On Sun, Mar 12, 2000 at 01:37:01PM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote: > On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 11:14:56PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > The simple fact you are missing is that Debian is not an industry. > > Which doesn't mean that all arguments are not valid. As Manoj pointed out, > being outdated is not making us reach our technical goals.
However, just because a distribution does contain kernel x.y does not mean it is technical excellent or even up-to-date (I want to point out that most distributions always contain up to date versions of the kernel, apache, X and gnome, but most other packages are often older versions than in Debian). > > Don't make the same mistakes as the industry. Making last minute changes and > > rushing in x.0 versions of critical software is just Plain Wrong. > > Especially the Linux kernels are often very unstable 'til x.12 or 14. > > No one ever suggested dumping 2.2 for 2.4. All that's talked about is ADDING > a 2.4 image. Nothing wrong with that, if it contains a warning that various packages may not work with this kernel installed (as long as it is not tested much). Thanks, Marcus -- `Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org Check Key server Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org for public PGP Key [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Key ID 36E7CD09 http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]