At 16:44 24-1-2002 +0100, Matthijs van der Klip wrote:
> The tricky part with all of this is we probably should to fold in the
> appropriate xfs fixes from the cvs tree, there are a lot of them since
> these rpms were spun.
But then it wouldn't be an 'official' release (1.0.2) anymore, would it?
Then why not call it 1.0.3
The only part that needs to be exchanged would be the kernel on the install
disk and may-be xfsprogs.
The installer uses 2.4.7 anyway so the installer would not be lost.
Although wrapping all this up would still mean a significant amount of time.
By the way, what is the exact problem this kernel is supposed to fix?
Every program has two purposes one for which
it was written and another for which it wasn't
I use the last kind.