I haven't tried it as I understand that there are some signifigant
differences in the interface between the two versions. If I'm really
off base here (as that's just what I've surmised reading the list),
someone please correct me, and I'll probably give it a swing.
> haven't ran a 2.1 kernel in ages, but it sounds like things are shaping up
> nicely. Maybe I can wait for 2.2. From your message though, it sounds
> like I can run 2.1, but have to do cold boots anytime I bring the system
> down. Hopefully that won't be too often!
>
Well, that's kind of my thought too, but as the box I'm running is not
going to have a head, I wanted to avoid any problems that could arise
in administering it remotely.
> According to the 2.0 kernel docs, the Tlan driver is "experimental". Does
> anyone have a take on how well it performs and how stable it is?
>
It hasn't given me any problems but then I'm not putting much of a load
on it. I must say though, 100Mb/s is nice: never had a net that did that
before.
> I know that a lot of work has been done on the SMP code in 2.1- is it
> worth running over the lastest 2.0.36pre8 in a production enviroment?
>
It seems to be judging from everything I've read & seen (parallelization
is one of my areas of interest), just wish I could run it on my multi-
processor to really put it through the ringer (runs great on the uni's
I've put it on).
> Thanks for the info!
>
Quite welcome.
> Aaron Turner | Either which way, one half dozen or another.
-"Zow"
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/