On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 22:33:31 +0100 (BST), Ken Moffat wrote: >On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Lyn St George wrote:
A quick update for the record. >> At the moment I have an LFS5.1 system on a 2.4 kernel. I want >> to update this to something akin to LFS6.1 (or HLFS6.1) for reasons >> of security, but retain the 2.4 kernel for reasons of stability. >> > > I think you really need to define what stability means for you. There >are a few spacialised places where 2.4 might have merit, and a few >specific drivers that aren't in 2.6 or are apparently troublesome, but >for most desktop and server workloads 2.6 should give much better results. > >> Choices seem to be: >> 1/ update (or build again) the 5.1 system with various packages >> updated (OpenSSL, zlib etc etc) [snip] I ended up using the LFS 5.1 glibc 2.3.3 package (which I still had lying around), gcc 3.3.4 (LFS 5.1 should use 3.3.3, but this is no longer available from the usual places) which has LFS patches, plus kernel 2.4.31 headers, and then the latest stable versions of everthing else as given in either LFS, BLFS, or HLFS 6.1. It is being used for creating virtual servers (which don't have a kernel but use the host's kernel) and after a few weeks testing I can say that this works out to be rock solid. These are fully loaded with perl, php, python, rexx, apache, mysql, postgresql, java, postfix, and so on and so forth. The only problem I have is with Erlang (for eJabberd) but Google shows segmentation faults with this to be quite common. So if anyone else wants to go down this path then it is definitely workable. - Lyn -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
