"stable" versions

[Michael Shigorin]

On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 08:59:54AM +0800, John wrote:
> >it's just that infamous "latest stable" Linux 2.6 is only
> >getting somewhat stable this year.  I'd consider getting it on
> >servers probably at the same old rule-of-thumb's 2.6.20...
> RHEL and Fedora Core users seem happy with 2.6.

Well I don't particularly care for FC users since they either
*do* understand it's beta forever (and need no care) -- or
*don't* (and may need a hint but definitely not exactly care).
:-)

> I've been using it some time myself with no stability problems
> (except on my laptop and Id' not assume 2.4 would be better
> there),

I know that, still it directly [well actually by an analogy]
contradicts this:

> Well, _I_'d not use MySQL for POS, or willingly, for anything.
> [...] I had a discussion on a MySQL list some years ago, and
> the authors didn't understand why floating-point (real) numbers
> are not good for counting money <rolls eyes>.

I mean, seeing VMs and schedulers shuffling all around doesn't
help one being confident for at least some base part of a server.
And dot-twenty is Solar Designer's RoT which I've came to share.

Aside from that, VServer was officially stable only with 2.4
until recently ;-)

-- 
 ---- WBR, Michael Shigorin <mike at altlinux.ru>
  ------ Linux.Kiev http://www.linux.kiev.ua/