| 1 |
On Saturday, 30 December 2017 00:18:12 GMT Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> If you want to fix the bugs, then by all means soldier on. But if your |
| 4 |
> intent is to have a working system that boots, probably drop using |
| 5 |
> 4.14.x and go back to say 4.12.x ? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
But the whole 4.12 branch has been masked, so that won't do. Here, I've had |
| 8 |
to go back to 4.9.49-r1 (amd64, not ~amd64). But now I see 4.9.72 has been |
| 9 |
stabilised. I think I'll wait for some stabiliity in the kernel version |
| 10 |
offerings before I make another move. Three kernel compilations on six |
| 11 |
systems within a week are a few too many. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
-- |
| 14 |
Regards, |
| 15 |
Peter. |
Archives