| 1 |
Yep, nitro is "only" ck + bootsplash + some other stuff. And guess what? |
| 2 |
That's why I use it, and not ck! I have never had any problems with it, and |
| 3 |
I find it to be a better patchset than gentoo-sources. I only wish it was |
| 4 |
updated more often, but the maintainer is pretty busy right now. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
And I don't care a whole lot that nitro is unsupported. The dev I asked on |
| 7 |
the issue simply said they don't want to have to provide support for tons of |
| 8 |
kernel patchsets, which I agree they shouldn't have to do. I have also found |
| 9 |
that a lot of naysayers haven't even used nitro, or only used a much older |
| 10 |
version, which makes me skeptical. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
On 10/5/05, Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann@××××××××××××.de> |
| 13 |
wrote: |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Hi, |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> ok, coaranm aside - have you EVER seen a dev recommending love- or |
| 18 |
> nitro-sources? |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> I have not! Never! Never ever! |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> There seems to be a reason that a) no dev has recommended them so far and |
| 23 |
> b) |
| 24 |
> they are not in portage. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> And puulease.. nitro is nothing more than |
| 27 |
> ck+bootsplash+someotherunneededstuff. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> If you want the 'latency enhancement' of nitro, go directly to ck - Con |
| 30 |
> Kolivas knows what he does. |
| 31 |
> -- |
| 32 |
> gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> |
Archives