From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 07:27:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 07:27:11 -0400 Received: from 62-190-217-19.pdu.pipex.net ([62.190.217.19]:58373 "EHLO darkstar.example.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 07:27:10 -0400 From: jbradford@dial.pipex.com Message-Id: <200210081141.g98BfcSf010201@darkstar.example.net> Subject: Re: [QUESTION] Is 2.5.41 useable? To: jabiru_croc@yahoo.com (Brad Chapman) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 12:41:38 +0100 (BST) Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20021008105729.79814.qmail@web40019.mail.yahoo.com> from "Brad Chapman" at Oct 08, 2002 03:57:29 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > > Is 2.5.41 useable, i.e. will it mostly work without Oopsing or crashing? > > > > It is way too soon for anybody to be able to say - it's only been released > > for a day! > > Hmmm. Perhaps I should have asked the question, "Does 2.5.41 contain any code > that would be likely to impact performance or stability?" Well, you should definitely grab the latest Procps, as Linus pointed out, otherwise things like top will misbehave with 2.5.41. 2.5.40 is fine, though. > > I can tell you, though, that I used 2.5.40 on three machines since the day it > > was released without a single oops or crash. > > Excellent. I'll try 2.5.40 first. If you have any problems with 2.5.40 or 2.5.41 just post them to the list :-). John.