[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Sat, May 10, 2003 at 07:58:20 +0100, Alex Charrett wrote: > improvement. To be honest %99.9 of users should never need to consider > compiling their own kernel, whether you consider it a triviality or > not. And much as I risk putting the numerous debian zealots on this > list's noses' out of joint, debian is (imo) one of the worst offenders > of this (cue flame war..). Debian pioneered apt, we love packages! I never compile *anything* nowadays. And I like it that way. When I using Red Hat and a suitable package could not be found, guess what I had to do? Compile. And Dan, yes compiled stuff is (slightly) faster. My flatmate compiled KDE, and it was a second or two faster booting than mine. But as Alex said, it is negligible. It simply is not worth doing it. There has been many debates about this on the Debian mailing lists. Tests have been done. It is not worth it. Got it? :) Debian stock kernels any do support most archs: kernel-image-2.4.20-1-386 - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.20 on 386. kernel-image-2.4.20-1-586tsc - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.20 on Pentium-Classic. kernel-image-2.4.20-1-686 - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.20 on PPro/Celeron/PII/PIII/PIV. kernel-image-2.4.20-1-686-smp - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.20 on PPro/Celeron/PII/PIII/PIV SMP. kernel-image-2.4.20-1-k6 - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.20 on AMD K6/K6-II/K6-III. kernel-image-2.4.20-1-k7 - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.20 on AMD K7. kernel-image-2.4.20-1-k7-smp - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.20 on AMD K7 SMP. -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.