[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Why 2.2 kernel instead of 2.4



On Wednesday 17 April 2002 21:46, jeff wrote:
> well, how about a few of us on the list get our heads together and make
> our own debianized release with all the new goodies we would like to
> see. i think it could be done - maybe a little part-time project - for
> peeps who could dedicate at least 4-10 hours a week or somethin' like
> that. i like all the new stuff too...haven't seen any real problems even
> with unstable...but, then again, i'm only using debian at home...but i
> think tackling our own distro of debian would be - for lack of a more
> intelligent term - pretty cool. that is the nature of linux? no? 'do it
> yourself'?
>
> -jeff
>
> using kernel 2.4.18, Windowmaker, and unstable...wheee!
>
> p.s. i've been playing with CRUX linux too...it might be a nifty
> alternative...it's light, fast, and uses mostly new packages...pretty
> slick! no apt though   :-\

We use woody at school with a 2.4.18 kernel without the slightest probs. I use 
it also at home.
I don't think that there is any reson to _not_ take the 2.4 as default. Its 
very stable and MUCH better than 2.2. I also think that woody should use ext3 
defaultly.

Shipping a distro today with a standard 2.2 kernel is not smart. Because 95% 
need to update because they want XFree 4 working probbably with their nvidia 
cards. Iptables woud be missing and so on.

cheers,
Raffaele
-- 
Raffaele Sandrini <rasa@gmx.ch>
Annoyed about M$ Windows? Don't worry. Try Linux! (www.linux.org)
For encrypted Mail get my Public Key from "search.keyserver.net"
ID: 0xEC4950E9


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



Reply to: