[H-GEN] Linux kernel 2.2 and RedHat 6.0 Stability

Bradley Marshall Bradm at uq.net.au
Tue Jun 8 19:54:38 EDT 1999


(Note reply-to: being general at humbug.org.au vs Bradley Marshall <Bradm at uq.net.au>)

On Wed, 9 Jun 1999, Steve Elliott wrote:

> > Heh...the Kernel that comes with RH6.0 is _not_ very stable. We just had
> Been seeing a few probs with the kernel under rh6 - so would a person be
> better off with a prev version of rh if they were setting a machine up
> from scratch ? 

Depends on what the system is for.  Personally, about the first thing I do
when I install a new system is compile a kernel for it.  Running with the
default redhat kernel, which has modules for just about everything under
the sun, probably isn't the best thing to do.

For a server, running 6.0 without having tested it beforehand is, well, a
little unwise.  I have yet to see a decent x.0 release from Redhat - for a
production server, I'd stick with the well tested old versions, until
you've convinced yourself that the newer version is stable.  Plus, not
compiling a custom kernel for a server is insane, both from a security
and resource point of view.

There is no reason not to update to a later (stable) version kernel, if
its available, unless you know there is a problem with it with your
hardware. The key here is - test - try to replicate the environment as
closely as you can.

HTH,
Brad
         +=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+
         | Bradley Marshall    | http://www.uq.net.au/~zzbramar |
         | System/Network Admin|      brad at humbug.org.au        |
         | Plugged In Software |    bmarshal at plugged.net.au     |
	 +-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+
 ``I'm not ashamed.  Its the computer age.  Nerds are in.'' - Willow (BtVS)




--
This is list (humbug) general handled by majordomo at lists.humbug.org.au .
Postings only from subscribed addresses of lists general or general-post.



More information about the General mailing list