Hmm, maybe I'll try CK. How stable is it?
It's a helluva lot more stable and bugfree than -mm....
it's aim is:
These are patches designed to improve system responsiveness with specific emphasis on the desktop, but suitable to any workload.
so it's generally, very stable. I am on the mailing list, and as of late, there's been no major problems or anything with it. hasnt been for a while too!
if you want CK with a bit more, try:
http://kem.p.lodz.pl/~peter/cko/
which has some extra patches like reiser4 and fbsplash. or just do what i do and reverse the fbsplash patch and apply bootsplash.
iphitus
]]>Hmm, maybe I'll try CK. How stable is it?
From my rather limited experience, pretty stable, and offering some very nice goodies over vanilla. In fact, it's the only patched kernel that I find useful.
]]>Lemme check it ;-)
]]>2.6 for me is a big step forward, with a new improved graphics driver, udev, wireless driver - ipw2100, and reiser4.
all of which dont run in 2.4.
skoal: if you think the difference between 2.4 and 2.6 was big in regards to your xmms not skipping etc, you should try the CK kernel. Con Kolivas' staircase scheduler is an awesome piece of work, and I see a notable increase in responsiveness and interactivity whille running it.
]]>I'm a huge fan of 2.6 though, and I've been using it since 2.5.9, no complaints, except a few issues with CD burning in the early versions, but those have been cleared up with upgrades to cdrecord.
]]>Really though, the I/O schedulers are what make the 2.6 kernels shine, as far as I'm concerned. The upcoming support for inotify will also make things a bit easier as monitoring files should be a breeze.
]]>Generally speaking, 2.6 has only advantages on powerful(ie not old) machines.
What you may find more difficult is the hundreds of new options in the 2.6 kernel if you compile and customize it yourself.
]]>I have a 2.4.20 kernel sitting on my other partition that I boot into as a recovery. I guess I've gotten so spoiled in 2.6, when I booted into 2.4 the other day, the first thing I noticed (visibly) performance wise:
While running XMMS, upatedb, and find at the same time, I had several noticeable pauses, including a skip or two in XMMS. When I booted back into 2.6, I did the exact same thing and it never skipped a beat.
Really impressive. Really.
Honestly, I couldn't say the same for even Windows 2000 when I had it on this exact same rig a while back. When I hit my hard drive hard, this 2.6 I/O schedulerer really shines...
]]>