It's not so hard to understand, the question is when there is something that
_has_ to be done by changing the kernel. Most people don't generally go
around compiling for kicks (ok a few maybe do ;)), and pretty much all won't
go down the route of compiling the kernel if there _is_ an alternative.
For example, can you change the kernel frequency without? (think there are
plans to approach that in future so you don't need to, but I believe
currently it still needs a recompile).
At that point, what do you do? Whether that means you should choose a
different dist is fine if its needed, but thats a separate discussion really
and has to be based on a users requirements.
Ian
On 4/2/06, Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2006-04-02 at 06:50 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
>
> > There are hundreds of packages added to the CentOS kernel by the
> ^^^^^^^^
> I meant "patches"
>
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQBEL7tmTKkMgmrBY7MRAr4hAJ4iR85RAvi+BhXp4QAex4DDyuJjxwCgl2NQ
> o+kTbRGsBZlwKj3g9ZwVuAM=
> =WQDo
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060402/15b26adc/attachment.htm
