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 feature. > > It seems like a rather bad idea because it > > could very well break the setups of a number of people. I think that neither 2.0.29 nor 2.0.30 have a sufficient quality for the Debian release. > 2.0.29 is the proper kernel unless Herbert can assure us that he has fixed > all known bugs especially in relationship to networking. I doubt that Herbert has any methods for assuring anything over a 30 Megabytes source tree. The kernel developers didn't manage to fix all known bugs in 2.0.30, and I expect them to have significiantly better skills in this area than Herbert. Herbert does a good job with kernel-image, but we must not request him to fix arbitrary kernel bugs. Sven -- Sven Rudolph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; WWW : http://www.sax.de/~sr1/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .