Re: Is sarge in a pre-release phase?
Michael Kahle <michael.kahle@scc-wi.com> writes:
> I have a server that is dedicated to doing backups via Amanda. I have
> recently purchased a Intel Pro 1000 Server adapter for this machine.
What kind of an adaptor is it? A network card? More recent 2.4
kernels should include a driver for this, as "e1000".
> To get this adapter working, I rolled my own 2.6.2 kernel, but this
> introduced more problems onto my Woody machine.
As you've noticed, 2.6 kernels won't run particularly well on woody.
Given the Linux kernel's history, I wouldn't put much faith in 2.6
kernels running particularly well at all at this point, particularly
for server applications. If I were going to build my own kernel, it'd
probably be a 2.4.25 kernel at this point.
> My question is this. Is it "safe" to install sarge on a production
> server. I do not have "must run flawlessly without intervention"
> requirements on this server. It does take care of my backups, but I
> have a few spare DLT's lying around that I could use to get dumps of
> other servers if I was in an emergency situation. I have been
> interested in playing with the new sarge installer and I thought
> this would be a good opportunity if need be.
I personally would still be a little wary of it, but it's your system.
:-) The big thing to be worried about is probably that sarge doesn't
get security updates; it can take a couple of days (or longer) for
updated packages to trickle through from unstable, where an update in
stable (security) or unstable would be available almost immediately.
But if you really do need a 2.6 kernel, your best bet might be to go
with unstable or testing and track that to keep up with package fixes.
--
David Maze dmaze@debian.org http://people.debian.org/~dmaze/
"Theoretical politics is interesting. Politicking should be illegal."
-- Abra Mitchell
Reply to: