Re: compiling 2.6
From: William D. Tallman (wtallman_at_olypen.com)
Date: 03/17/04
- Next message: William D. Tallman: "Re: compiling 2.6"
- Previous message: Tris Orendorff: "Help with Improper Shutdowns"
- In reply to: Timothy Murphy: "Re: compiling 2.6"
- Next in thread: Timothy Murphy: "Re: compiling 2.6"
- Reply: Timothy Murphy: "Re: compiling 2.6"
- Reply: P.T. Breuer: "Re: compiling 2.6"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 11:32:37 -0500
Timothy Murphy wrote:
> William D. Tallman wrote:
>
>> So what is the consensus on compiling the 2.6 kernel: cram it in the
>> kernel
>> or keep it as modules?
>
> I didn't understand this question.
> I don't see any difference re modules between 2.4.* and 2.6.*
There are functions said not to be compiled directly into the kernel, and so
not available as modules. Obviously, I haven't read all the literature,
but thought I'd ask here to see if any differences have already been noted.
May I ask how extensive your experience with this new kernel might be?
>> It's certainly not as straightforward as the 2.4
>> and earlier versions, it seems.
>
> It doesn't seem to me any less "straightforward".
> The GUI interface to "make xconfig" is a lot nicer.
Ummm... well, I don't really like GUIs all that much, so I can't comment.
Thanks,
Bill Tallman
-- Registered Linux User: #221586 Mdk-10.0 and Slackware-9.1 A Luxuriance of Linux!!!
- Next message: William D. Tallman: "Re: compiling 2.6"
- Previous message: Tris Orendorff: "Help with Improper Shutdowns"
- In reply to: Timothy Murphy: "Re: compiling 2.6"
- Next in thread: Timothy Murphy: "Re: compiling 2.6"
- Reply: Timothy Murphy: "Re: compiling 2.6"
- Reply: P.T. Breuer: "Re: compiling 2.6"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|