RE: 1.2.13 and patches
Doug Ledford (dledford@dialnet.net)
Tue, 9 Apr 1996 00:18:38 -0500 (CDT)
One more thing I thought of. I know that most of the people on this list
use 1.3.xx, and therefore have little need for this patch. However, a
lot of the people in the news groups do. This brings me to a sticky
issue with this patch. Although this isn't an official 1.2.14, the
makefile does declare the code to be so. The reason is that the
include/linux/version.h generating code was broken if I used something
like 1.2.13-patched or 1.2.14-unofficial in the main Makefile. For that
reason, I don't want to advertise this patch anywhere but here on this
list unless the powers that be approve it going out with that version
number (it really is sooooo heavily patched that I think anyone would
have a hard time calling it 1.2.13). I would appreciate those "powers
that be" letting me know what they want me to do on this issue. Should I
let it out beyond this list, or keep it here?
*****************************************************************************
* Doug Ledford * Unix, Novell, Dos, Windows 3.x, *
* dledford@dialnet.net 873-DIAL * WfW, Windows 95 & NT Technician *
* PPP access $14.95/month *****************************************
* Springfield, MO and surrounding * Usenet news, e-mail and shell account.*
* communities. Sign-up online at * Web page creation and hosting, other *
* 873-9000 V.34 * services available, call for info. *
*****************************************************************************