2.6 kernel status
nick at hkcamp.gotdns.com
Thu Jun 17 17:36:05 EDT 2004
I don't have the reboot problem on 2.6.6-1.427spk kernel in Fedora. It is
as stable as 2.4 ever was, and works very very well.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Toby Fisher" <toby at tjfisher.co.uk>
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup at braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 3:17 PM
Subject: Re: 2.6 kernel status
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2004, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> > Hi all.
> > I've asked this a while back. Is the 2.6 series of kernels ready for
> > production use (I.E. should I go ahead and upgrade my slackware 9.1
> > server to 2.6.6)? Back when I asked this, a number of people responded
> > that they wouldn't go putting 2.6 on a server just yet, and to wait a
> > while until distributions come out with it.
> > I know that fedora is 2.6 based, but are other distros? Are there
> > slackware folks here running 2.6 on production boxes? If I do upgrade
> > to 2.6.6, what are the pit falls I should watch out for in terms of
> > slackware packages which I might need in slack 9.1?
> > I've seen more and more folks on here upgrading to 2.6.6, so I thought
> > I'd ask this again, and get everyone's impressions the second time
> > around. Thanks.
> Gentoo still views it as developmental, but it seems pretty stable to me
> here, though because of all the stuff I've compiled in, the kernel image
> is over 1800 kb!
> The only problem I've found is that for some reason, on some boot-ups, and
> there's no reason for these happenings, the root file system, despite the
> boot messages, never gets remounted read/write, which causes lal sorts of
> probs, such as clamd not starting, and b eing unable to do much because
> /tmp is read-only, this also means you can't reboot cleanly because it
> can't write half the tuff it needs to, in other words, it's a mess.
> However, using e3fs I just hit the reset and it comes up nicely, sometimes
> this takes 2 or 3 goes, though recently I haven't had this problem quite
> so much, but I'm baffled by it much the same. Therefore I probably
> wouldn't use it on production systems as if they have to be reb ooted
> remotely or on a timed sequence you could loose service from them.
> Apart from that though, I'm happy with it.
> Toby Fisher Email: toby at tjfisher.co.uk
> Tel.: +44(0)1480 417272 Mobile: +44(0)7974 363239
> ICQ: #61744808
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
More information about the Speakup