Scott Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Alexander Koch said:
> > 2.0.30 has some problems, undoubtedly. I don't know if they're all fixed
> > with
> > 2.0.30-6 (it works perfectly fine here) but a usual 2.0.30 is poison...
>
> I've been following this discussion for a while now, and would lik
Alexander Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2.0.30 has some problems, undoubtedly. I don't know if they're all fixed with
> 2.0.30-6 (it works perfectly fine here) but a usual 2.0.30 is poison...
>
> Do you acively 'use' these features? Do you know the drawbacks and
> implications?
I can tell y
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Koch) wrote on 24.05.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Quoting Kai Henningsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Oh, I give in. There really is no excuse.
>
> There is.
No.
> 2.0.30 has some problems, undoubtedly. I don't know if they're all fixed
> with 2.0.30-6 (it works perfect
Alexander Koch said:
> 2.0.30 has some problems, undoubtedly. I don't know if they're all fixed with
> 2.0.30-6 (it works perfectly fine here) but a usual 2.0.30 is poison...
I've been following this discussion for a while now, and would like someone to
explain what's wrong with 2.0.30. I've been
On May 24, Alexander Koch wrote
> 2.0.30 has some problems, undoubtedly. I don't know if they're all fixed with
> 2.0.30-6 (it works perfectly fine here) but a usual 2.0.30 is poison...
>
> Do you acively 'use' these features? Do you know the drawbacks and
> implications?
>
> Though I can underst
"Christoph Lameter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> AFAIK
>
> Herbert has fixed bugs in the past in 2.0.30 and the current debian version
> is already heavily patched. Its not the question of asking him. He already
> did it. The question is if all (dont take all to extremes...) bugs known
> have fo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Goerzen) wrote on 23.05.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Sven Rudolph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Christoph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > On 21 May 1997, John Goerzen wrote:
> > >
> > > > Since we know of a number of things that have been broken in 2.0.30
> > > >
MAIL PROTECTED]>; debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Kernel 2.0.30 a bad choice for 1.3
> Date: Friday, May 23, 1997 6:09 PM
>
> Sven Rudolph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Christoph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > On 21 May 1
"Boris D. Beletsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> On 21 May 1997, John Goerzen wrote:
>
> Goerzen> Since we know of a number of things that have been broken in
> Goerzen> 2.0.30 (such as IP masquerading being totally hosed), why
> Goerzen> are we distributing that version with 1.3?
Sven Rudolph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Christoph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On 21 May 1997, John Goerzen wrote:
> >
> > > Since we know of a number of things that have been broken in 2.0.30
> > > (such as IP masquerading being totally hosed), why are we distributing
> > > that version
Christoph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 21 May 1997, John Goerzen wrote:
>
> > Since we know of a number of things that have been broken in 2.0.30
> > (such as IP masquerading being totally hosed), why are we distributing
> > that version with 1.3?
2.0.30 has SYN_COOKIES. This is a critical f
On 21 May 1997, John Goerzen wrote:
Goerzen> Since we know of a number of things that have been broken in
Goerzen> 2.0.30 (such as IP masquerading being totally hosed), why
Goerzen> are we distributing that version with 1.3? It seems like a
Goerzen> rather bad idea because it could ve
2.0.29 is the proper kernel unless Herbert can assure us that he has fixed
all known bugs especially in relationship to networking.
On 21 May 1997, John Goerzen wrote:
> Since we know of a number of things that have been broken in 2.0.30
> (such as IP masquerading being totally hosed), why are we
Since we know of a number of things that have been broken in 2.0.30
(such as IP masquerading being totally hosed), why are we distributing
that version with 1.3? It seems like a rather bad idea because it
could very well break the setups of a number of people.
--
John Goerzen | Running
14 matches
Mail list logo
