On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 00:25:27 -0400 Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I fail to see how 2.95 installing both 3.3 and 2.95 somehow equates to > a problem!
A failed kernel compile when trying to bring stability to a machine
constitutes as a problem in my book.
> I build kernels with alternate compilers all the time. Did you check
> the log to see which compiler the kernel actually built with?
Given that I told it to build with 2.95 and it failed in the same manner
as with 3.3 but when I installed 2.95 from Woody which ONLY installs 2.95 it
succeeded I, quite frankly, don't care if it compiled with 1.10.0.101.10.2.
2.95 should install what it says it installs, 2.95. Debian has version
numbers in the names for a reason and that reason being when people NEED the
previous version and not to upgrade to the current one.
See the whole thread about exim vs exim4 as reference.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
| -- Lenny Nero - Strange Days
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
pgpObY4Tf4W0w.pgp
Description: PGP signature
