From: Patrick McFarland <unknown@panax.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Which is better at vm, and why? 2.2 or 2.4
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 13:49:27 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011013134926.H249@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20011013133301.G249@localhost> <E15sSti-0003ME-00@the-village.bc.nu>
In-Reply-To: <E15sSti-0003ME-00@the-village.bc.nu>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 638 bytes --]
Well, I dont actually need anything thats provided in 2.4 thats not provided in 2.2. I tend to use standard hardware. Would 2.2 be a better choice?
On 13-Oct-2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Hmm, it seems that I didnt realize I had to cc that to the list, because I =
> > belive this is something that should be on the list.
> >
> > Anyhow, exactly how much tweeking did you do, and isnt the ac tree suppost =
> > to be unstable?
>
> The -ac patches vary in stability. The release announcement for each one is
> intended to be a guide to how stable I expect it to be.
>
--
Patrick "Diablo-D3" McFarland || unknown@panax.com
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-10-13 17:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20011013132327.F249@localhost>
[not found] ` <E15sSey-0003Jf-00@the-village.bc.nu>
2001-10-13 17:33 ` Which is better at vm, and why? 2.2 or 2.4 Patrick McFarland
[not found] ` <E15sSti-0003ME-00@the-village.bc.nu>
2001-10-13 17:49 ` Patrick McFarland [this message]
2001-10-13 17:02 Patrick McFarland
2001-10-13 17:16 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-13 18:06 ` M. Edward Borasky
2001-10-13 18:17 ` Patrick McFarland
2001-10-13 18:29 ` Rik van Riel
2001-10-13 18:42 ` Patrick McFarland
2001-10-13 18:53 ` Patrick McFarland
2001-10-13 18:58 ` Rik van Riel
2001-10-13 19:04 ` Patrick McFarland
2001-10-13 19:10 ` Rik van Riel
2001-10-13 19:28 ` Wilson
2001-10-13 20:12 ` [solid]
2001-10-13 20:21 ` Patrick McFarland
2001-10-13 19:17 ` Rik van Riel
2001-10-13 18:37 ` M. Edward Borasky
2001-10-20 0:38 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-10-20 1:05 ` Robert Love
2001-10-20 19:56 ` Mike Fedyk
2001-10-20 20:03 ` Robert Love
2001-10-13 17:48 ` Mark Hahn
2001-10-13 21:29 ` Mike Fedyk
2001-10-13 21:47 ` Mark Hahn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20011013134926.H249@localhost \
--to=unknown@panax.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.