Re: Installed 2.0 to SS4 ...
mat <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.aurora.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Joacim Melin wrote: > I have two SS5.s (110 and 170) and the 110 will get the 2.0 > treatment. And a Ultra 1. The 170 still won't work with Linux will it? > I can't speak for the SS5s, but my ultra1 is doing fine under aurora: [root@aurora ~]# uptime 00:00:40 up 374 days, 19:15, 1 user, load average: 0.09, 0.03, 0.00 I do have a sparc classic LX that I'd like to get around to trying aurora 2.0 on though... I'll let you know how I get on. Slowly, I would imagine. - -- [email protected] | www.fsck.no-ip.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (MingW32) iD8DBQFEyUaN3nxx0MO2o1sRCmw8AKCaD//dHStCK3TalDl9O5z2VyB3igCeMXwk sGf3su9spWSAmKEr5Y6K9uU= =8eN0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Aurora-sparc-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.auroralinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aurora-sparc-user Aurora FAQ: http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~mas01r/aurorafaq.html