Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S312920AbSDKUmT>; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 16:42:19 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S312928AbSDKUmS>; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 16:42:18 -0400
Received: from ip-75.linuxis.net ([64.71.162.75]:57550 "HELO moria.linuxis.net")
	by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id <S312920AbSDKUmQ>;
	Thu, 11 Apr 2002 16:42:16 -0400
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 13:38:19 -0700
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: The latest -ac patch to the stable Linux kernels
Message-ID: <20020411203819.GA32605@flounder.net>
In-Reply-To: <20020409233710.GD22300@flounder.net> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0204091646380.28293-100000@dlang.diginsite.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
From: Adam McKenna <adam-dated-1018989500.4371a1@flounder.net>
X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/0.49 (Python 2.1.2 on linux2)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:47:47PM -0700, David Lang wrote:
> all the -ac kernels need to be treated as -pre
> 
> if you watch in detail you can pick ones that are more likly to be stable
> then others, but some of them will be intentionally cutting edge.

I was under the impression that the -ac line has a bunch of VM fixes that
haven't been merged into the main tree yet, which should make it better under
high loads than the standard kernel.

Is this no longer the case?

--Adam

-- 
Adam McKenna <adam@flounder.net>   | GPG: 17A4 11F7 5E7E C2E7 08AA
http://flounder.net/publickey.html |      38B0 05D0 8BF7 2C6D 110A
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/