Why is 3.2 still the latest kernel in unstable??
Posted: 2013-04-25 03:09
I am not trolling... I am simply curious...
Is the primary motivation for including an older kernel with Debian security?? I've been building and using the latest stable kernel on each of my Debian boxes (all on unstable) for quite some time, without any stability issues whatsoever. I haven't really looked into their security in detail, however (I'm no penetration tester). I've built the kernels with forced premption (esp. great for the older machines).
All of my "boxen" run Fluxbox and can run OpenGL reasonably well.
Is the primary motivation for including an older kernel with Debian security?? I've been building and using the latest stable kernel on each of my Debian boxes (all on unstable) for quite some time, without any stability issues whatsoever. I haven't really looked into their security in detail, however (I'm no penetration tester). I've built the kernels with forced premption (esp. great for the older machines).
All of my "boxen" run Fluxbox and can run OpenGL reasonably well.