> Maybe you got the idea from the fact that now you have a lot more people
> working on and submitting changes than was ever made under 2.4. That could
> give a false impression that it's not as stable.
>
> The 2.6 kernel offered such an improvement that it attracted a lot more
> developers. Fortunately their work can all be done in parallel, with full
> version and bug control and testing, resulting in a much improved kernel.
I've been using the 2.6 kernel since the dev 2.5 tree. It has been completely rock
solid for me. It's also a lot easier to build.
Just as a side note, there are some 2.6 features especially with USB and hot swap
that make it necessary in my environment. For example, some external hard drive
enclosures work spottily under 2.4 but just work under 2.6. I ran into this today
when backing up some files to a USB hard drive under a 2.4 kernel.
-- * The Digital Hermit http://www.digitalhermit.com * Unix and Linux Solutions kwan@digitalhermit.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 18:53:28 EDT