Re: Which is better at vm, and why? 2.2 or 2.4

[Patrick McFarland]

--5oH/S/bF6lOfqCQb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Well, I dont actually need anything thats provided in 2.4 thats not provide=
d 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, becaus=
e I =3D
> > belive this is something that should be on the list.
> >=20
> > Anyhow, exactly how much tweeking did you do, and isnt the ac tree supp=
ost =3D
> > to be unstable?
>=20
> 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.
>=20

--=20
Patrick "Diablo-D3" McFarland || [e-mail]

--5oH/S/bF6lOfqCQb
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE7yH6m8Gvouk7G1cURAgjXAJ95cASaSbtzcK92XrFrK5f7INHekwCfaE/X
vUYk9koQVe+Zwrw4VAE5q+c=
=5/I4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--5oH/S/bF6lOfqCQb--