On 28-Jul-11 15:36, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> options IMHO are:
>
> - 2.6.32.x (has performance issues, but is long term)
> - 2.6.38.x (good performance, not longterm yet)
> - 3.0.x (immature, but the future)
May I ask why you did not include the latest longterm 2.6.35
(which I'd personally vote for)? I have no info about those
performance issues of 2.6.32, but they might have been already
solved in 2.6.35...
Jarry
-- _______________________________________________________________ This mailbox accepts e-mails only from selected mailing-lists! Everything else is considered to be spam and therefore deleted.Received on Thu Jul 28 16:43:17 2011