Why 2.2 kernel instead of 2.4

[Grant Edwards <grante@visi.com>]

I notice that "woody" installs a 2.2 kernel instead of a 2.4
kernel.  Are the reasons behind that decision?

I'm hoping to start shipping a product that has Debian
installed on it in a couple months, and hopefully the "stable"
release of 3.0 will be out by then.

Is the plan to have "stable" 3.0 run a 2.2 kernel?

There's nothing particularly wrong with the 2.2 kernel, but I'm
starting to see reports of device drivers that run under 2.4
but not 2.2, and one of the device drivers I maintain has
features under 2.4 that aren't available under 2.2.

I'm planning on building a custom-tailored 2.4.x kernel-image
package for above-mentioned product, but I'm wondering if I
should also include a similarly configured 2.2 kernel-image...

-- 
Grant Edwards
grante@visi.com


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org