[rescue] Re: G5 case

[Eric Dittman]

> > And it must be pointed out that the 2.2, 2.0, and 1.2 kernels had similar
> > teething troubles in the first few releases. Characterizing the 2.4 kernel
> > as a "fiasco" is completely false.
> 
> Yes, but in the earlier series of stable kernels, they weren't doing active
> development on it replacing large chunks of the core infrastructure. But in
> 2.4, the VM subsystem was ripped out and replaced with a new one, and the
> kernel developers aren't exactly convinced that the new one is better.

You mean "... and SOME of the kernel developers...".
The opinions are varied.
-- 
Eric Dittman
dittman at dittman.net