Subject: Re: Stablest Latest Kernel ;)
From: Stefan Jeglinski (jeglin@4pi.com)
Date: Mon Oct 22 2001 - 11:05:29 MDT
> > Does anyone have recommendations on what is the optimal kernel for an Old
>> World system? I am not doing anything fancy, and I don't have any pressing
>> issues at the moment ...
>
> Then you have no reason to upgrade.
This of course is a subjective statement. And to be sure, the
original question was pretty vague.
Consider the 2.2 series. If one reads the notes, s/he will find two
things of general interest: 2.2.19 (as most kernels I suppose) has
security updates/fixes (although it is difficult to evaluate their
importance), and as for the other late 2.2 kernels, the latest USB
stuff from 2.4 is continuing to be backported. If you have no
pressing issues, I guess you're OK, but if either extra security or
USB is important, it might be worthwhile to consider it.
> Unless you have a specific problem, again, there is no reason
> to upgrade. There seems to be this rampant tendency to upgrade
> for upgrading's sake.
I agree. But there is still the idea that security updates might be
helpful. Of course, this has to be balanced against potential
stability or other hair-pulling issues that might go with a new
kernel.
> I'm running 2.2.17 on a PowerMac 6500. It's been running my
> mail for the past 213 days straight. (It would have been up
> over a year, but the rolling blackout I experiened here in CA
> outlasted my UPS -- D'oh!) There is nothing a 2.4 series
> kernel would make better about it handling my mail.
Paul, we may have corresponded on this at one point, but can you tell
me again what ethernet card you have in your 6500 and what driver you
use with it? And is your 2.2.17 a kernel.org version, or is it
ppc-specific in any way (from a ppc tree, that is)?
Stefan Jeglinski
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Mon Oct 22 2001 - 10:17:06 MDT