High memory kernel support
Ken D'Ambrosio
kend at xanoptix.com
Thu Mar 17 17:28:01 EST 2005
Paul Lussier wrote:
>Mmmm, what reasons are there for upgrading to 2.6 at this point. I've
>thus far treated 2.6 as 'testing/unstable' kernel, and since many of
>it's nicer features (like SATA) are getting backported to the 2.4
>series, I haven't had a reason to venture into 2.6 land yet.
>
I'll bite: drivers do not a kernel make. Many of the subsystems (eg.,
memory management, kernel locking) have been substantially refined, and
I doubt that all the enhancements in, say, SATA are being backported.
In addition to that, IMHO, the 2.6 kernel is, BY FAR, the most stable .0
(and subsequent) release I've ever seen. Gone are the days of the 2.4.9
debacle, the 2.2.0 debacle, etc. I've been running with nary a glitch
since 2.5.58 (?) or so, and have upgraded all my important servers to
2.6 back at 2.6.3. I doubt it's 100% BugFree(tm), but I do think that,
kind of in opposition to your stance, unless there's a reason to stick
with 2.4 (such as, "It just works," which is a fine reason), 2.6 is the
way to go.
$.02, etc.,
-Ken
More information about the gnhlug-discuss
mailing list