Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1998-10,: Re: Avoiding SMP

# Re: Avoiding SMP

Zlatko Calusic (Zlatko.Calusic@CARNet.hr)
13 Mar 1998 17:18:03 +0100

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Jim Bray: "2.1.90-[12]: Possible ip/ppp routing problem"
- Previous message: Mark Spencer: "Re: network enhancement"
- In reply to: Chris Wedgwood: "Re: Avoiding SMP"

Chris Wedgwood <cw@ix.net.nz> writes:

> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 06:41:47 -0600 (CST)
> From: Thomas Molina <tmolina@probe.net>
> To: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
> Subject: Re: Avoiding SMP
> In-Reply-To: <199803100812.VAA10787@caffeine.ix.net.nz>
> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980310063758.5006B-100000@wr5z>
>
> Why is the SMP line uncommented by default anyway? If most people are
> building UP kernels, the default should be UP IMHO.
>
> Because His Holiness uses SMP?
>
>

Probably because 2.1.x is development tree, and we want a stable SMP
before stable tree (2.2.x).

To make it stable, we must test it thoroughly, do we?

And that comment about His Holiness is probably correct too. :)

Reagrds,

    --
    Posted by Zlatko Calusic           E-mail: <Zlatko.Calusic@CARNet.hr>
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    	Took an hour to bury the cat. Silly thing kept moving.

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu

- Next message: Jim Bray: "2.1.90-[12]: Possible ip/ppp routing problem"
- Previous message: Mark Spencer: "Re: network enhancement"
- In reply to: Chris Wedgwood: "Re: Avoiding SMP"