I upgrading is the idea.

Basically we will stop making improvements to the 2.0 kernel code; just
because we don't have the manpower. We know that code has several very
serious shortcomings, but it sort of works.  

The 2.1 code we will get up to a much higher standard, it is already much
more refined than the 2.0 kernel code and I haven't seen much irregular
behaviour recently. 

Unfortunately not all the 2.1.9? kernels work that well. But that will
stabilize too, and the problems are unrelated to coda it seems.

Peter

DOn Thu, 16 Apr 1998, John Carol Langford wrote:

> >Thanks for all your comments. You can also mail all these things to
> >linux-coda_at_coda.cs.cmu.edu then others can both help and profit too. 
> 
> Will do.
> 
> >Hm, if this is so it is a bug.  Now I believe that I had this bug in the
> >2.1 kernel code but I removed it with 2.1.91 or so.  Would you mind
> >upgrading, I think you told me you are running 2.1.88 which is just too
> >early. 
> 
> I'll upgrade.
> 
> >What kernel are your running.  I fixed most of these problems around
> >2.1.91 I think.
> 
> This was my home machine - 2.0.32.
> In order to get stable coda, do you need a 2.1.9X kernel?
> 
> -John Langford
>