-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Chris wrote: > On Sunday 09 July 2006 03:20, Ron Johnson wrote: >> Rich Johnson wrote: >>> The only philosophical basis is that 2.4 it is what the installer >>> installs...and that dist-upgrade doesn't see fit to upgrade it. >> Kernel 2.6 is "hidden", but running linux26 would install a 2.6 >> kernel. At the CD boot prompt, typing "help" (or maybe <F1>) would >> have shown you the options. > > Maybe an unrelated question, but why run a testing 2.6 kernel on an an older > machine in the first place? Are there any real advantages?
Better support for h/w. (For example, you may want to install a SATA card in your machine. I don't know how well 2.4 supports SATA.) The 2.6 kernel is where all new features like "more efficient ext3" are released. Even if 2.4 does everything you need/want, still, upgrade to 2.4.32 and go to .33 when it is released soon. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Is "common sense" really valid? For example, it is "common sense" to white-power racists that whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins are mud people. However, that "common sense" is obviously wrong. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEsMBqS9HxQb37XmcRAlgaAJwPmRG1Iu3GpQmkF2GfkQNDFDgPqgCg7wJT ZGOqe1B8i1lbI5y3KxdDfdU= =f/XK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
