Kernel 386 installed instead of 686

[Mike Bird]

On Fri, 2005-09-30 at 08:06, Matt Patterson wrote:
> It is just my opinion, but I feel that the lack of stable binary
> interface between kernels is a HUGE limitation on the viability of
> linux for widespread uptake. MOST users are completely incapable of
> recompiling modules for their specific kernel, thus it is necessary
> for everything to be precompiled. That leaves either a standardized
> binary interface to kernels of different builds, or a standardized
> kernel for each generation of a product as the only options.

The lack of a stable kernel ABI is the most serious problem with Linux
and the by implication and in fact the most serious failure of Linus'
leadership.  It is unacceptable that good people have to keep building
e.g. new madwifi modules and millions of people have to keep hunting
around for them every time a security patch necessitates a kernel
upgrade.

However, unless Ubuntu wants to fork the kernel too, it's not relevant
to this list.  It's a sad fact of life that since the kernel developers
went into permanent play mode a couple of years ago it's become
considerably more expensive to deploy and maintain Linux.

--Mike Bird