Ummmm... maybe you have a _slight_ conflict in some of your hardware stuff there... bad coolers (45% less
possible if you said 2.0.xx kernels were stable) or there might be a hidden bug in a new 2.2 driver...
It will be more useful if you post your h/w configuration :)
> I guess about the only useful information from this is that 2.2 is not yet
> as stable as it will be, and people who need it for high-availability
> applications should wait a while longer (or help fix bugs).
I just can't understand your anger...
As a matter of fact I'm using 2.2 from its "pre" stages and didn't blow my system up at all. Only the
2.2.0-pre6 vfat bug made me cry for a 3Gigs amount of lost data but that's life and, after all,
backup product vendors should earn their money in a honest way, don't you think ?
Anyhow, my system is even overclocked, stuffed to death with weird components (different scsi controllers,
cdwriter, 1 voodoo card, 2 pci NICs,a scsi and ide hdd) making NT and win9x die like bastards :-X and
Linux is _very_ stable on it :)
Stefan.
--Death to all fanatics!
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/