On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 09:31:26PM +0200, Michel Lanners wrote: > On 13 Aug, this message from Mike Fedyk echoed through cyberspace: > > On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 09:25:29AM -0700, Jeffrey W. Baker wrote: > >> What kernel is recommended for use on the tibook? I've currently got > >> 2.4.7 from mvista, and the kerboard is hosed and the hardware clock > >> doesn't work. > >> > > > > Let me ask this question also, but for oldworld machines, specifically, > > 7200, 6500, and oldworld g3. > > > > Will kernel.org ppc 2.4 kernels be ok for these systems? The systems I > > would be running would mostly be headless routers, file & print servers, > > and such. > > > Either kernel.org 2.2 tree, or the bk or benh 2.4 trees. 2.4 kernel.org > isn't ready yet. > > If you want to keep your servers running quietly in a corner without > touching them, 2.2 might be your best bet. Since you will not need all > the fancy new hardware support in 2.4, 2.2 is your best stable solution. > It's a bit slower than 2.4, but that shouldn't matter for your use. > For the machines that I *really* need to humm away, and keep working I'll use 2.2.
For 2.4, which tree breaks the least? Hopefully, there is a tree that will supply a bootable kernel that doesn't break core functionality depending on the time of day... Most of the complaints have been for changes affecting newer hardware. Do I have to worry about Oldworld functionality breaking as often? TIA, Mike
