Re: kernel version info from finger

G Sumner Hayes (sumner+@cmu.edu)
Tue, 1 Oct 1996 13:01:21 -0400 (EDT)

Agus Budy Wuysang <fswmis@rad.net.id> writes:
> How about adding latest version for each 1.2.x, 1.3.x, and 2.0.x for
> the "finger @linux.cs.helsinki.fi"? (not just 2.1.x)
>
What about 1.0.x, 1.1.x, and 0.99.x?

Actually, listing the latest stable kernel as well as the latest
development kernel is a good idea. When 2.0 came out, there was no
newer devel. kernel; now there is, so listing:

Linux 2.1.0 (DEVELOPMENT)
Linux 2.0.21 (STABLE)

would be a good idea. Otherwise people could be confused by the
switching back and forth (2.1.0 is released, then 2.0.22, then 2.1.1,
...) I see no reason to list obsolete kernels from the 1.3.x or 1.2.x
lines, though.

'Course, I just check funet to see what's there.

TTFN,

Sumner