On Thu, 2004-08-12 at 10:55, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-08-12 at 12:05, Russell Hanaghan wrote:
> > And now, darn it...you got me thinking I should try! Are there any
> > advantages to compiling and leaving out the bunches of crap I don't ever
> > use that are built in the kernel? Like resources, memory, speed savings
> > of any sort?
> >
>
> No, absolutely not. 99.99% of Linux users should use their vendor's
> kernel. It has undergone a LOT more stability testing than whatever you
> would compile off of kernel.org.
>
> You should only use a kernel.org kernel if you need some feature or
> driver that your vendor's kernel does not provide, or, obviously, if you
> are hacking the kernel. If you go this route you should attempt to
> build a binary package for your distribution, then install that. This
> way you can post the packages somewhere, and other people who need a
> custom kernel for their own purposes can just download your packages vs.
> repeating all that work.
>
> Lee
Whew! For a moment I thought I was going to lose the horse and my truck
wus gonna break down on a train track! {Hmmm...aint that a song??}
Appreciate the heads up. I sometimes find myself spending a bunch of
hours on nothing worth doing in the pursuit of "the fast machine!"
R~
>
