On Tue, Aug 31, 1999 at 10:12:35AM +0100, kevin lyda mentioned:
>valen at tuatha.org spoke thusly:
> > Reasoning being that having no poor patches for OOM was more likely to
> >speed up development of a good one, than a series of stopgap measures.
> yes, but it seems that 2.3.x is fixing that. also i think alan's recent
> 2.2.x release notes have some oom fixes.
Woohoo. Three years waiting for a new kernel, and they release one that
dies if you run xanim on a big file, without using the -f option. But
that's OK, because 2.4 will fix that. Barf. I'd be a lot more cranky, only
I know I couldn't do it myself.
> > Same reasons devfs and GGI never made it in...I thought it strange that no
> >one would maintain a kernel with all the wierd shit in it, that Linus said
> >"No!" to ...
> they do. look at the "unofficial patches" section of
>http://www.kernelnotes.org/ . there's even a kernel debugger patch
> (courtesy of sgi).
I had more meant a ecgs type of split. So, you would have standard Linux
and a "more featured, flaky Linux". And then there are those that would say
"But Linux is a more featured, flaky freebsd"...
Kate
--
Microsoft. The best reason in the world to drink beer.
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!
