From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19431 invoked by uid 1002); 23 Jan 2003 19:54:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 3940 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2003 19:54:00 -0000 Message-ID: <030901c2c318$5d1390f0$0605010a@VELDYT> From: "Thomas T. Veldhouse" To: "Kim Nielsen" , References: <200301232105.50700.gentoo@dewet.org> <200301231916.43581.aoyu93@dsl.pipex.com> <20030123192045.GA29326@localhost> <200301232133.28383.gentoo@dewet.org> <20030123194106.GA9824@localhost> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 13:48:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-sources vs "stock" kernels X-Archives-Salt: 8f7a729b-e0a7-490c-b2aa-542c169806b3 X-Archives-Hash: 793020d33f23d1f635efc89adb40b74a I don't think there is any such intent. By what I can see and know about Gentoo, it is for any use that one sees fit. It was never designed for any particular application. Now in reality ... Gentoo is bleeding edge (and I have seen bloodying on occasion) and it is up to the administrator to make sure that gentoo changes don't hose a production machine. Tom Veldhouse ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kim Nielsen" To: Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 1:41 PM Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-sources vs "stock" kernels The gentoo kernel is quite stable but Gentoo was never ment as a server distribution even though it serves just as well as others like Redhat or Debian. It was intedned for network/developer use /Kim -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list