Re: [Summary-Talk] Why is summary so unreliable?

[Cameron Knowlton <cameronk@xxxxxxxxx>]

well, Helen, we're talking about Summary. the Summary talk list seems a 
good place to talk about Summary problems.



>Is there a reason for the rest of us subscribed to this list to have to
>receive all the messages in this back-and-forth conversation between the
>two
>of you while it's worked out?  I guess I'm saying it would be my
>preference
>that you take this off-list.
>
>Regards,
>Helen Glazer
>
>ÿ ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ
>Online Services
>George Glazer Gallery
>http://www.georgeglazer.com
>Antique Globes, Maps & Prints
>ÿ ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ•ÿ
>
>On 10/1/04 12:59 PM, "Bret Baptist" <bbaptist@iexposure.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday 01 October 2004 11:35 am, Jason Linhart wrote:
>>> On 10/1/04 12:13 PM Bret Baptist (bbaptist@iexposure.com) wrote:
>>>> No, the first is running debian 3.0 with a kernel 2.6.7 on a P3 866 with
>>>> 2GB registered ECC RAM and 1 40GB IDE drive, the other is Mandrakelinux
>>>> 10.0 with a 2.6.3 kernel on a dual P3 866 with 2GB registered ECC RAM
>>>> and mirrored 74GB Ultra 160 SCSI drives.
>>>
>>> I did my testing on RedHat 9 with kernel 2.4.20 on an AMD processor. The
>>> second machine was OS X 10.3 on a dual G5 tower.
>>
>> OK?
>>
>> Do you have a 2.6 kernel to test on?
>>
>>>
> >> Jason
-------------
Go to <http://summary.net/list.html> to update subscription info.