Re: Linux 2.0 and 2.1 stability..

Dave Wreski (dave@nic.com)
Sat, 01 Nov 1997 01:44:24 -0500 (EST)

On 31-Oct-97 "Lauri Tischler" wrote:
> Anno Domini 31 Oct 97 at 9:20, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> In short, it wasn't really worth even fixing, looking back at the problems
>> that fix then caused. A 2.0.32 with the memory leak would not be a
>> disaster.
>
> Maybe I'm making myself an asshole once again, but isn't it a bit
> arrogant to say that memory leak (any memory leak) is not worth of
> fixing? How do you classify 'non-disastrous' leak ?
> Cheers..

I think I agree with you, but also fear I'm making myself an asshole again..

Does 2.1.x also have memory problems? Any chance of starting to produce a
current problem report in the 2.1 patches, so we know what to expect when using
2.1? It kinda sucks having 64M, and not even having enough memory to format a
floppy..