On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 22:50 -0600, Shane Hathaway wrote: > > (Tangent: I find Linus' kernels to be much more stable than > distribution kernels; anyone else have the same experience? This is > contrary to the wisdom I hear on the net. Maybe it's because I > configure the kernel for specific machines rather than throw in every > driver available.)
I think you will see less of this as time goes by. I hear a lot of talk about how they are not trying to deliver a finished product like you would expect someone like Red Hat to deliver. They realize that the majority of kernels in the wild were packaged by a distro and they don't seem to want to duplicate that effort when they could be working on the next big thing. I'm not saying you can't run a vanilla kernel, I'm just saying that they are not trying to productize it. Now, kernel stability should be up to your distro. If you can't get a stable kernel from them... then it's time to jump ship. In three years with Red Hat (and now CentOS) kernels I've only seen one (1) kernel panic and it was my fault for messing with the modules for digium hardware (zaptel). I don't know how others have done with them. YMMV. Gabe .-----------------------------------. | This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. | | Don't Fear the Penguin. | | IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net | `-----------------------------------'
