On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 11:34:44AM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote: > I presume you mean 2.4 and 2.6. > > Six months ago the Stable release of Debian couldn't run 2.6 kernels > without installing a few updated packages from their backports.org > repository. There has been a release since then that includes native > 2.6 support.
Six monthes ago Debian 3.1 was released. Let's forget ancient history (Woody was released in 2002. Hmm... still a bit after XP). BTW: Sid now has 1.2.1 packages for the braves among you. Expect a Sarge backport this weekend. > > There are many areas where 2.6 improves upon 2.4 from processor and > interrupt scalability to latency improvements. I would recommend any > new server be installed with a 2.6 kernel unless there is some workload > that requires a specific 2.4 kernel. I believe most of those were > removed with the 2.6.5 to 2.6.8 anonVMA changes by Andrea. Right. Though "2.6" is kind of a moving target that keeps mutating -- Tzafrir Cohen | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | VIM is http://tzafrir.org.il | | a Mutt's [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | best ICQ# 16849755 | | friend _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users