Slackware 11! :D

[iago]

I'm talking about the install sequence.  I see no reason for it to not be an option.

Because it's considered beta/'testing', which means it won't always work. 

It's a kernel, though!  It should be implemented into the install sequence.

Because it's considered beta/'testing', which means it won't always work. 

Then they should fix it. :P

Why do you think it's beta?  :P

[Sidoh]

I'm talking about the install sequence.  I see no reason for it to not be an option.

Because it's considered beta/'testing', which means it won't always work. 

It's a kernel, though!  It should be implemented into the install sequence.

Because it's considered beta/'testing', which means it won't always work. 

Then they should fix it. :P

Why do you think it's beta?  :P

It worked fine when I compiled my own kernel. :P

[iago]

But when you compiled it, it's configured differently than the way Slackware configured it.  That's probably why.

But yeah, you're suggesting that they make this beta version, which didn't work on your laptop, should be easier to install?  Make it easier for people to potentially render their installation unusable?  Phoey! :P

[Sidoh]

But when you compiled it, it's configured differently than the way Slackware configured it.  That's probably why.

Obviously!

Anyway, why does kernel.org say: "The latest stable version of the Linux kernel is:     2.6.18"?  It must be a damn stable beta! :)

But yeah, you're suggesting that they make this beta version, which didn't work on your laptop, should be easier to install?  Make it easier for people to potentially render their installation unusable?  Phoey! :P

Huh?  It works fine on my laptop.  Did you mean the install package or the kernel?  I couldn't get the package to work on my machine either. :(

[Joe]

In the linux world, there's unstable, stable, and release. A finished version is always marked "release", and a working beta is "stable".

[iago]

x86] link=topic=7495.msg93550#msg93550 date=1159989894]
In the linux world, there's unstable, stable, and release. A finished version is always marked "release", and a working beta is "stable".

What about Alpha?  Production?  Testing? 

Every project (open-source and not) uses its own set of conventions.

[Sidoh]

x86] link=topic=7495.msg93550#msg93550 date=1159989894]
In the linux world, there's unstable, stable, and release. A finished version is always marked "release", and a working beta is "stable".

There isn't a "release" version listed on kernel.org.

[Joe]

www.slackware.com.

I'm getting my three install disks as we speak. :)

:)..........:):):):)....:):):):)....:):):):):)
:)..........:).............:)...................:).....
:)..........:):):):)....:):):):)..........:).....
:)..........:).............:)...................:).....
:):):)....:):):):)....:):):):)..........:).....