Vanilla Kernel 2.6 Stability vs 2.4?
chromis asks: "I am a 'Linux-from-scratch' like Linux user. I maintain my system for almost 4 years that way. I'm still using kernel 2.4, and I'm a little bit afraid for updating to 2.6 because of the problems like stability issues, driver subsystem problems, etc. I once tried 2.6.0 a long time ago, but I experienced random freezes which I could not diagnose. We all know about the development model issues, and I often read complaints about current kernel development practices. Now that kernel 2.6.13 is out, I really want to ask Slashdot: if you are a vanilla 2.6 kernel user, how are your experiences with these plain kernel.org 2.6 kernels? Is it really as bad as some people claim, or is 2.6 only usable when using a distro from a large vendor like Red Hat, SuSE, etc? I really would like to upgrade to the new vanilla 2.6 kernel eventually, but I'm a little hesitant. Any advice?"
I use the vanilla kernels with moderately modern hardware (up to about 4 years old) and I have no stability issues whatsoever. I tend to stay within one or two versions of the bleeding edge release.
The advantages of the 2.6 kernels (udev, nptl, device driver model) outweigh the disadvantages (i.e. risk) for my situation, in my opinion.
That said, I still use linux-2.4 on my headless server, mainly because I haven't been bothered to upgrade it recently. It works fine, so I see little point in changing it.
I've used various incarnations of 2.6 on my mythtv box. It's under fairly high load, with memory, video and disk intensive processes, has high PCI utilisation (2 capture cards, sometimes running at once). It runs 24/7, sometimes hot enough to get the CPU temp alarm beeping.
Number of times it's had a kernel panic over the last year? Zero. Good enough for me.
And as other posters have said, the advantages with hardware, latency patches, acpi support help too.
You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.
I can't speak for the vanilla kernel, but the Gentoo 2.6.13 kernel borked my system something fierce. The init process grinds to an virtual stop just after loading the kernel, it took a minute and a half to set the host name, I still haven't had the patience let it finish booting. But that's the risk of using a fresh kernel. 2.6.12 didn't give me any trouble.
A Free Market requires informed intelligent consumers, such people are rare, we're in trouble.
Doesn't the FC3 at the end of the version string mean "Fedora Core 3"?
That's not a vanilla kernel, it's a patched up kernel from RedHat.
The 2.6.8 kernel had an issue with CD writing (only root could do this). This has been corrected in later kernels. You may have to delv into the udev rules to get things setup the way you like. Read the fine HOWTO on writing rules for udev.
My cd-rom did not get recognized after boot unless the ide-cd module was called before udev started. There was a mixup with tty and pty in the default udev rules around the time of switch between 2.6.7 and 2.6.8 and it obliterated the 'less' and 'man' commands. How convenient is it that I can't run 'man udev.rules'?
I believe this has also been remedied since then. If in doubt I suggest taking the following steps.
Title of the second document is "The post-halloween document. v0.48 (aka, 2.6 - what to expect)". That should tell you everything you need to know about upgrading from 2.4.
/^([Ss]ame [Bb]at (time, |channel.)){2}$/
Built a Hylafax http://hylafax.org/ system on top of the latest v6.1, LFS http://linuxfromscratch.org./
:->, http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hints/contribute.h tml or a much needed "hints" writeup, http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hints/.
Details:
3GHz Intel Pentium 4 Processor, 1Gb RAM
11,878.40 BogoMIPS Total, 250Gb Hard Drive
GCC 3.4.3
Samba 3.0.14a
HylaFAX 4.2.1
Gotta say it's way ahead of expectations.
I won't touch another distro now for my mission critical.
Although, Knoppix, http://www.knoppix.org/ and Ubuntoo, http://www.ubuntulinux.org/ are great "insert CD and run" distros, for workstations.
Working with SlackWare seems effortless also, http://www.slackware.org/.
Was fortunate enough to meet the fine gent who started the LFS project: Gerard Beekmans
Highly recommended support for the project, even if it's just $5 for a beer via donations
I am using a plain vanilla kernel (2.6.13) on my Slackware 10.1 system, and it's very very stable. The earliest 2.6 kernels were a bit unstable for me, but since 2.6.8 or so, they have been very very stable. I notice that my self-configured 2.6.13 kernel is faster than the Slackware vanilla kernel (2.4.29). GNOME responses faster to my actions, for example.
objorkum dot com