Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 18:32:36 -0500 From: ^chewie Subject: [linux-lvm] Which kernel? Message-ID: <20000924183236.B14632@wookimus.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ZPt4rx8FFjLCG7dd" Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-linux-lvm Errors-To: owner-linux-lvm List-Id: To: linux-lvm@msede.com --ZPt4rx8FFjLCG7dd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Which of the recent kernels should I "upgrade" to in order to use LVM? =20 A little background. I recently, sometime last month, went to 2.4.0-test6 and put almost every parition I had under LVM. It worked great! The only problem is that test6 isn't the most stable of kernels at the moment. I haven't had any large problems with it, but I've been unable to do certain things, such as use the printer port, etc. Basically, I need to recompile the kernel, and I'm not confident that the "testX" series will do me good. I was looking into going to a recent 2.2.x kernel (as in > 15 ), but noticed that the LVM patch wasn't available for these kernel versions. The last patch I saw on the "test" versions (2.3.x) was for 99, but since I'm not sure what the status is even on this test kernel, I'm still not sure I want to use "test" kernels any more. (Being bitten a couple times makes one nervous when handling the snake-like test's.) What do you recommend I use? What's the status of the LVM patches to 2.2.x kernels? Anyone had overall success with the 2.4.0-testX series? --=20 Chad "^chewie, gunnarr" Walstrom http://wookimus.net/chewie --ZPt4rx8FFjLCG7dd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE5zo8UDMcLGCBsWv0RAracAJwI9K05MEDLJCQ+pHeLPYSUvI6qOwCeKi1O shuQ+JFyePtHrZAcs9sEcqQ= =G13g -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ZPt4rx8FFjLCG7dd--