on Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 08:44:47PM +1100, Steve Kieu (haiquy@yahoo.com) wrote: > > Hi all, > > Yes I put this question as I saw a lot kernel image > :-) It depends. For a stable firewall/gateway system, I'd probably go with a 2.0 or 2.2 kernel. Yes, the firewalling code in 2.4 is a lot more convenient, but the kernels have been...rocky. 2.0.40 is out, IIRC, and after about 2.0.20-something, that's virtually all bugfixes. So the code should be solid. For a desktop system, 2.4 buys you integrated reiserfs support (it's there in 2.2, but you have to patch), and additional device support (USB, Firewire, some other stuff), and better SMP support. For any kernel series, you want to be on the later builds -- there are more fixes out, and often some really bad bugs fixed. There was a bad stretch in 2.2 from about 2.2.8 - 2.2.14, and even the more recent kernels have had some exploits. Similarly, 2.4.10+ are the only kernels in the 2.4.x series without major uglies yet -- reiserfs was badly broken, and there've been some ongoing VM issues. Some people still aren't satisfied with the demonstrated quality of the 2.4 series yet. I'm running 2.2.17 and 2.2.19 on my own boxes, am just setting up a 2.4.10 system for a friend. Yes, I should update my own kernels. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html
Attachment:
pgpI3WnERVSox.pgp
Description: PGP signature