linux 2.6 general tips?

[venkman]

I'm thinking of giving linux 2.6 a try. I'm not the most technical of users, but I'm no newbie either. I usually use whatever the latest version of Redhat is. I have with some difficulty built a 2.4 based kernel before. I was wondering if there is anything I should be aware of before I try building a 2.6 kernel. Also, will I need to rebuild gnome, kde, X, or any other pieces of software to get them to work with the new kernel? Also, is it okay to start with a Redhat 9.0 system or should I install another distro? I have enough room to install something else (currently I have SuSE on the extra space, but I never use it).

Oh, also, I'm running a P3-1 GHz with whatever built-in video is on the motherboard and 512 MB of RAM.

any tips much appreciated. My apologies for not searching the forum first; if there's another thread related to this, please direct me to it.

-Venkman

 

[sleipnir214]

If you describe yourself as "not the most technical of users", then I question the wisdom of running a beta-version kernel. Linus hasn't certified 2.6 yet.

Want the best answers? Ask the best questions:

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

TANSTAAFL!!

 

[Morsing]

Applications doesn't care about the kernel (normally). You usually need to update the system libraries (glibc) and a list of system utilities. There is a list somewhere but I can't remember where.

Having the latest RedHat distro is usually very close to the list though.

New releases of the kernel are unstable up till about v. 10 (2.6.10). You probably don't need the new functionality anyway, so all you gain is instability.

Cheers

Henrik Morsing
Certified AIX 4.3 Systems Administration
& p690 Technical Support

 

[venkman]

that's kind of below the belt don't you think slepnir? I was only 1 vote below you on the Linux Client/Desktop top experts list for a few weeks... until I got lazy and stopped responding to other people's threads.

I was just trying to say I probably couldn't sit there and compile apache, openssl, kde, and everything else from scratch, keeping track of each one's dependency on the other...but I can handle tweaking config files and running:

./configure
make
make install

if that's all it takes. Basically, that's what I'm trying to ask, is that all it takes? Or am I going to banging my head against my monitor repeatedly for several days trying to get my pc to boot? And is there any tips people can give me to speed up the general reconfiguring of my system to get 2.6 to run. I've heard it may be a lot faster, and I'd like to see if that's the case.

-Venkman

 

[sleipnir214]

venkman:
Let's not allow our thin skin to get in the way of good advice.


Short answer: It's more complicated than compiling an application. But here's a link to the Linux kernel HOWTO:

http://www.linux.org/docs/ldp/howto/Kernel-HOWTO/

. You can see for yourself.


Long answer:
I still strongly recommend that the 2.6 kernel not be used by anyone inexperienced in kernel surgery until Linus Torvalds signs off on it. Until that time, the 2.6 kernel must be considered a work in progress.

(Okay, the Linux kernel is a perpetual work in progress, but anything in the new kernel could change at any time.)

And to steal Morsing's comment, 2.6 will likely not be ready for production for a while yet.


I'm not sure whether upgrading from 2.4.x to 2.6.x will require you to recompile apps, but I don't think so. Minor kernel revision changes do not -- but I haven't installed the new kernel to know for sure.

Caveat emptor.

Want the best answers? Ask the best questions:

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

TANSTAAFL!!

 

[venkman]

Yeah, sorry to jump on you like that, but I haven't gotten my fill for the day on arguing in the opinion forums so I have to get my angst out somewhere else .

That said, the link you listed seems to be for total newbies. I have compiled a kernel before.

How unstable could 2.6 be? I can deal with a crash now and then... and even if I ran into a lot of crashes I would just stop using it. However, I have 2 hard drives in the test machine. I'll be running my experimental system off of one, but I cannot allow the other to get damaged. If I don't mount any of the partitions on the important drive will it be safe? Is there a possibility 2.6 will just decide to randomly write to the drive?

As to the question of why, I have no real need for 2.6, but I do just like to play around with whatevers out there... and the curiosity is killing me.

-Venkman

 

[sleipnir214]

I don't know how well the 2.6 kernel plays with others.

Here's the part I forgot about until just now. Linux and whichever boot managager (LILO or grub) you're using gives you the ability to have both kernels available. Just edit your boot manager's configuration file to give you the choice of which kernel to boot with. In fact, it would not suprise me if that HOWTO document talks about this. It's pretty standard to leave the old kernel on the machine until you are satisfied that the new kernel works.

Want the best answers? Ask the best questions:

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

TANSTAAFL!!

 

[venkman]

yup, that's what I was planning to do... although I was going to just start with a fresh distro install first... that way if I have to change any components I don't have to worry about that affecting the system when I run it under 2.4.

-Venkman