Re: 2.4 vs 2.6

[coderman]

Jan Rychter wrote:

> So, as for me, 2.6 is a definite no-no. I see no advantage whatsoever in
> running it, it caused me nothing but pain, and there is no improvement
> that I could see that would justify the upgrade.
>
> So please be careful when making statements like that. 2.6 is *NOT*
> stable enough nor ready enough for people to use it, unless those people
> have a narrow range of hardware on which the 2.6 kernel has actually
> been tested (translation: they have the same hardware as the main
> developers do).
>  
For every person who has problems with 2.6, there are probably 2 others
who have none, and enjoy the benefits of the new features.  2.6 works
great for me, and one a number of hardware configurations including:

- PII-266
- SMP dual PIII-550
- M10000 mini-itx
- 1.1 Ghz Athlon

all with a variety of video chipsets, USB devices, IDE / ATAPI disks
and CD/DVD, sound cards, etc.

I doubt many of these are consistent with the main developers.

2.6 may not be usable for you, but this has no bearing on the utility
of the branch for others.  I have noticed benefits (mainly prempt,
IPSEC, and the IDE device handling) which make it very worthwhile.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/