 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
> I take that back. There are three different kernels, but the differences
> are all in security patches. I don't know what I was thinking. I'll
> blame it on the whiskey or something. ;-)
Yeah, the difference is only in the part after the dash, for example
"2.6.18.8-0.9" here. It indicates which security update has been applied
to the kernel "2.6.18.8".
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> You're not the only person I'm responding to here.
Who else claimed you were bashing Solaris?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>
> I mean, if the POV-Ray team released a brand new version of POV-Ray that
> was exactly like the old one but up to 3% faster in certain cases...
> would anybody care? No, not really. Yet the Linux kernel apparently
>
Yes, I would :).
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> You're not the only person I'm responding to here.
> Who else claimed you were bashing Solaris?
Ah. So you *are* claiming I was bashing Solaris.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >> You're not the only person I'm responding to here.
> > Who else claimed you were bashing Solaris?
> Ah. So you *are* claiming I was bashing Solaris.
No. Now you are nitpicking about semantics.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Eero Ahonen wrote:
>
> Possibly (I already have a netbooting NetBSD for MicroSPARC (SS5)), but
> OpenBSD would be the nerdiest overkill for the job of garmaugh (the
> Netra) :).
Looks like I might be more tempted to look after OpenBSD.
[ 12.741076] Uniform Multi-Platform E-IDE driver
[ 12.800823] ide: Assuming 33MHz system bus speed for PIO modes;
override with idebus=xx
[ 12.909583] mice: PS/2 mouse device common for all mice
[ 12.978231] usbcore: registered new interface driver usbhid
[ 13.052840] drivers/hid/usbhid/hid-core.c: v2.6:USB HID core driver
[ 13.138639] TCP bic registered
[ 13.176875] NET: Registered protocol family 1
[ 13.232926] NET: Registered protocol family 17
[ 13.293318] RPC: Registered udp transport module.
[ 13.356853] RPC: Registered tcp transport module.
[ 13.921983] IP-Config: Failed to open eth0
[ 13.972889] IP-Config: Failed to open eth1
[ 15.032961] Sending DHCP requests ...... timed out!
[ 97.102510] IP-Config: Retrying forever (NFS root)...
Yep, 2.6.25.
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>>>> You're not the only person I'm responding to here.
>>> Who else claimed you were bashing Solaris?
>
>> Ah. So you *are* claiming I was bashing Solaris.
>
> No. Now you are nitpicking about semantics.
And you aren't?
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>>> Warp wrote:
>>>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>>>>> You're not the only person I'm responding to here.
>>>> Who else claimed you were bashing Solaris?
>>
>>> Ah. So you *are* claiming I was bashing Solaris.
>>
>> No. Now you are nitpicking about semantics.
>
> And you aren't?
>
You two were made for each other :)
--
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 11:45:25 -0700, Chambers wrote:
> You two were made for each other :)
I'm glad someone said it, and that it wasn't me who did. ;-)
(I might've thought it, though - does make for entertaining reading <g> -
no offense, guys)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >> Warp wrote:
> >>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >>>> You're not the only person I'm responding to here.
> >>> Who else claimed you were bashing Solaris?
> >
> >> Ah. So you *are* claiming I was bashing Solaris.
> >
> > No. Now you are nitpicking about semantics.
> And you aren't?
No. I just said that your original sentence could be easily interpreted
as if you were bashing Solaris, and if you are even aware of that. (And
then, humorously, I suggested that you are actually doing it on purpose.)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
