Actually, I'd say the threading (NPTL) changes were a really good reason to call it 9 and not 8.x As for calling it 9 and not 9.0 - well: If the next release kernel is actually 2.6 then it will have to be a 10 release and not a 9.x so no 100% confirmation there But If the next release kernel is .21 or .22 and they go to 10 then yes I guess they may be playing the Netscape: 'My number is bigger than your number' game :-) unless there are some other dramatic changes Hopefully it will be out soon I've had 2 problems with the standard redhat kernel: 1394 and USB2 Hate having to boot to Win98SE to copy to my USB2 drive - fails under all redhat .20 - hopefully some useful changes will be in the next release And when I built a .21 with the 'then' latest 1394, dvgrab worked fine with my DVCam but none of the redhat .20 worked with it - but my .21 was unstable - too much me changing things no doubt Mike Burger said: > In all honesty, from what I've heard/read, 9 wasn't a major upgrade over > 8.0, but it received a major number for its release version. > > On Sun, 14 Sep 2003, Marie-Therese Lorentzen wrote: > >> Is there a major problem with RH9 that it already needs go a whole step >> up? <snip> -- -Cheers -Andrew MS ... if only he hadn't been hang gliding! -- Shrike-list mailing list Shrike-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/shrike-list
