May I need to upgrade to higher kernel and how?

[mikezang]

I am using a special Linux package, it was built with Kernel 2.0.39, now I want to know if I need to upgrade it to 2.2 or 2.4 (not 2.6, because I heard 2.4 is fast for single CPU and I never use this package for multi CPU), how can I know which version is the best for upgrade? and how can I do it if I want to do? of course, I hope all functions are reserved and the totals size is similar scale.

Thanks a lot for your suggestion.

[Parcival]

Well, if the kernel you have currently installed does everything you need it to do, there's no reason to upgrade unless security factors call for an upgrade.

To learn how to upgrade a kernel have a look at the JustLinux Library.

[mikezang]

Thanks for your suggestion, May I ask more detail?
I have a P2 333MHz ThinkPad 570 with 6GM HD, and I have RH7.3 and FC4 CDs, I want to install one of both as a web server, do you think which version better for this case? Then If the RH7.3 is better, may I have to upgrade to RH8 or RH9?

[stumbles]

Since you haven't said what the "special Linux package" is and what it's requirements are, you should *really* consult those who made that "special Linux package".

There may be some gotchas when moving to a different kernel, which *might* require an upgrade of gcc, glibc, coreutils just to name a few.

[mikezang]

Since you haven't said what the "special Linux package" is and what it's requirements are, you should *really* consult those who made that "special Linux package".

There may be some gotchas when moving to a different kernel, which *might* require an upgrade of gcc, glibc, coreutils just to name a few.
The kernel is 2.0.39 vfat a.out format, and package includes Samba-1.9.18p10, I thought ther are too old, so that I want to upgrade them to higher version. I asked but no one answered me, maybe it is too old.

[stumbles]

The kernel is 2.0.39 vfat a.out format, and package includes Samba-1.9.18p10, I thought ther are too old, so that I want to upgrade them to higher version. I asked but no one answered me, maybe it is too old.

Um yeah, Samba is currently at 3.0.20b and the kernel, well pick one :)

If all your wanting to do is use it as a samba server, then after backing up any important files pick a distro of your choice. Which ever one you choose, save yourself a lot of heartache and just use the most current stable version of the one you choose.

As for 2.4 being "faster" than 2.6. Well, I have heard those rumors though I have not seen any hard evidence to support that notion.

Being that your going to use it on a laptop, my suggestion is a 2.6 kernel with udev, sysfsutils and hotplug.

Again whatever you install make it the most current stable version.

[mikezang]

I forgot a key point, this samba server is in 1 FD, that is the problems!
Now it is not bad as a samba server, but only samba file server, I want to let it also become printer server, then I hope it supports telnetd, at last, I hope the printer can use USB port.

By the way, I got answer from the original auhtor, his answer as below:
1. 1FD is too small, telnetd is no way.
2. printer server needs lpd, no way, the reason as above.
3. 2.0 → 2.4, no way, the reason as above.

what do you think about this answer, I'd like to try it, is it real possible?

[stumbles]

Why can't you use the 6G hard drive?

[mikezang]

Why can't you use the 6G hard drive?
This is the first problem, because my laptop no built-in CD-ROM, it has a CD-ROM port, but I don't have such CD-ROM, I only have USB CD-ROM, then this laptop also no built-in FD driver, but has a port to external FD driver what I have.

This is why I have to use 1 FD samba, now I can share 6G HD with my windows client, now I want to use it as printer server and support telnet as its screen doesn't display anything, an so on.

But at the moment, I got a iear, I will try it tonight. I am going to copy boot image to the 6GM hd and copy all CD's contents to that HD from windows client by samba, then boot from that HD, is this prossible?

[Parcival]

From my point of view, this sounds all too difficult. If I were in your situation, I would not upgrade with the given hardware and run this setting as long as possible (i.e. until it dies of a hardware failure, etc). Instead, I would focus my attention on the net security. If you run your server in a firewalled private local network where you can trust all your clients then you should be all fine. If you can't trust your clients or are not sure about the firewall then you should put some effort into solving these problems regardless of wether you are running a legacy server or not.

If you want to upgrade, I would advise to buy some different hardware first. Go to a computer sale and pick a model that has a builtin CD-ROM plus USB, a second hand computer like this should not cost much since you can easily pick an older model. Once you got that baby running as a server, I recommend you turn your laptop into a music jukebox. :)