Re: Patch 2.2.10 is wrong
david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
14 Jun 1999 17:21:02 -0700
In article <linux.kernel.Pine.LNX.4.10.9906141325010.807-100000@cyrix200.lameter.com>,
Christoph Lameter <christoph@lameter.com> wrote:
>Keeping linux up to date does not only mean the kernel but also the tools
>etc. The only distro allowing this is the unstable debian distribution. I
>am running daily upgrades of the distro with the super apt tool. Get out
>of the stoneage not only with the kernel but also with the corresponding
>tools. It really is possible and I have done it that way for a long time.
>
>patch has been changed a long time ago by the way.
OpenBSD, as of last fall, used patch 2.0.
If patch 2.5 isn't compatable with a version of patch with the same major
number that's less than two years old, patch 2.5 is broken.
____
david parsons \bi/ patch 1.0 is prehistoric. patch 2.0 is up-to-date.
\/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/