You are not logged in.
Not a problem, but I recently noticed that liquorix kernels are now available for Arch (yes, sometimes I'm a bit slow in reading things). I've used Liquorix kernels for quite some time in Debian because Debian kernels do have a tendency to get long in the tooth (such as testing at this point will no longer be advancing past 3.2 kernels until after Wheezy is released. At this point that's still modern...but for how long, so I'll probably switch back to Liquorix). But Arch isn't one to have very outdated kernels, so I'm just wondering exactly what's different with the Liquorix kernels for Arch that makes them desirable over the stock Arch kernel? Or is it just one of those "different strokes for different folks" type of things.
Thanks for your thoughts!
Offline
You can compare the PKGBUILDs, configs and patches for the kernels to get an idea what's different.
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Kernels doesn't offer much info.
Last edited by karol (2012-02-29 17:19:04)
Offline
moderator action: Moving from Arch Discussion to AUR Issues, Discussion & PKGBUILD Requests.
aur S & M :: forum rules :: Community Ethos
Resources for Women, POC, LGBT*, and allies
Offline
..... exactly what's different with the Liquorix kernels for Arch that makes them desirable over the stock Arch kernel? .....
some benchmarks with liquorix kernel
some more benchmarks with liquorix kernel
In short, it gives lower latency.
Offline