From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <00ab01c47322$73784280$0301a8c0@chuck2>
From: "Mark Chambers" <markc@mail.com>
To: "David Woodhouse" <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc: "Embedded Linux PPC list" <linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org>
References: <20040726134847.84704.qmail@web15214.mail.bjs.yahoo.com> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0407261021120.6190@localhost.localdomain>
Subject: Re: 2.4 versus 2.6 patches
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 11:08:44 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org
List-Id: <linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org>


> If 2.4 works already for you, by all means use it -- but if you're doing
> any new development, or you _really_ want people to care when you find
> bugs, it really ought to be 2.6.
>

Well, this is a surprise to me.  Does the stock 2.6 even compile on 8xx yet,
or are you talking about 8xxx and/or IBM?

Mark Chambers


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/