 | | | Kernels (was: Re: RHN icon problem) | Kernels (was: Re: RHN icon problem) 2005-05-13 - By Stephen Gardner
Back
On Fri, 13 May 2005, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 10:13 -0700, Stephen Walton wrote:
>> The RH patched kernels are largely a good thing, but
>> for lab computers I'm seriously thinking about Gentoo or Ubuntu;
>> i.e.,
>> a distro which uses the stock kernels by default.
>
> just to help you out of your dream; Ubuntu most certainly doesn't use a
> kernel.org kernel (and is more heavy patched than 2.6 RH kernels), and
> Gentoo at least for the longest time was far more heavy patched than RH
> kernels; I must admit that I haven't looked at a gentoo kernel in a
> while though.
Indeed and I don't believe direct comparisons can be drawn between the
RHEL kernels and those of many other (especially non-commercial) distros
who have different goals to Red Hat. In a lab environment RHEL itself may
not be the best options for just that reason. Most specialist kernel
patching projects are patching against the "current" kernel.org source.
Gentoo has changed a bit with ~29,000 lines differentiation from the stock
kernel but again the comparison breaks down because linux-2.6.11-gentoo-r8
is a 2.6.11 baseline as opposed to the RHEL4s 2.6.9 parentage (I realise
I should be doing v2.4.21 comparisons on the taroon-list but don't have
the time at present).
Stephen
--
Taroon-list mailing list
Taroon-list@(protected)
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/taroon-list
Earn $52 per hosting referral at Lunarpages.
|
|
|