On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 01:59:37AM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote: > 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. I have been running 2.4 for some six months now, mostly for iptables. > 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. A few days ago I first met with VM trouble: the dillo browser (alpha version) ate memory quite rapidly. The first time I was able to shutdown the system, but when I tried to reproduce it the swapping went on for hours. I was able to issue a shutdown, but the shutdown process never got past the first two lines so did a reset. At work I have 2.2.18pre21 and it has survived heavy swapping (many hours) several times. Uptime is now 12:07pm up 269 days, 22:36, 2 users, load average: 0.09, 0.08, 0.01
Attachment:
pgpf0f4RfzPhw.pgp
Description: PGP signature