On 12/16/05, Rodd Clarkson <rodd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > kernel-2.6.14-1.1767_FC5 > > ------------------------ > > * Thu Dec 15 2005 Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> > > - 2.6.15-rc5-git5 > > > > * Wed Dec 14 2005 Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> > > - 2.6.15-rc5-git4 > > - Try 'optimise for size' again. > > - Silence noisy CD drives that spew msgs when probed whilst empty. > > > > * Tue Dec 13 2005 Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> > > - 2.6.15-rc5-git3 > > - Use MMIO instead of PIO for 8139too > > FC5 seems keen to get me to run the smp kernel (I'm on a uniprocessor > machine without hyperthreading). I've noticed with this update (since > the smp kernel runs - the one that came with the original install > didn't) that the smp kernel seems to be noticeably slower than the > non-smp kernel. > > > > selinux-policy-2.1.6-4 > > ---------------------- > > * Wed Dec 14 2005 Dan Walsh <dwalsh@xxxxxxxxxx> 2.1.5-4 > > - Fixes to allow automount to use portmap > > - Fixes to start kernel in s0-s15:c0.c255 > > I'm not getting any of the kernels installed to boot without adding a > selinux=0 to the boot process. I don't think this is kernel related, > but something to do with selinux. The kernels get to the point where X > starts and the cursor appears and then nothing else happens. Dropping > to the vt (CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE) shows the hardware initialized, and then > no further progress. > There is a problem with today's selinux-policy. Revert to the prior one. Believe it will be fixed in tomorrow's rawhide. > > Rodd > > -- > "It's a fine line between denial and faith. > It's much better on my side" > tom -- Tom London -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
