© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
0e1f616
(Get the code!)
Stefan,
I have to agree with Henrik regarding the logic seeming backwards, but I suppose that's because the "solution" hurt me.
Did Serge Hallyn ever take a look at it? I got the impression someone was going to try to backport part of the fix, but it sounds like that path was rejected.
Regarding the Maverick and Natty backport kernels, I had the problem Kai had (the Maverick backport was broken and it took a MONTH to fix, which is not what I consider "fully supported") along with issues with drivers for my video card and LCD display. I haven't looked for or tried an Oneiric backport kernel yet, but at this point I'm definitely leery.
The main source of frustration comes from the sense that Canonical deliberately introduced a regression (disabling a kernel feature that had previously been enabled) to avoid a potential regression (backporting the fix) and the workaround of using a backport kernel would have been fine except that it wasn't.