recompiling the kernel

[GeoHoffman]

I am thinking about recompiling my kernel. Half just so I know how to do it and half because it is supposed to make things run a little faster. I am currently using kernel 2.4.xx. I looked on kernel.org's ftp site and I saw that kernel version 2.5.25 is the newest kernel release. But I also remember reading somewhere that kernels ending in an odd number are developement releases and are less stable. Would I be better off with v2.5.24, v2.5.25, or just sticking with my current version?

[gig2k1s]

It's the middle number you need to look at if you're are looking for the stable releases. For instance, 2.4.x is the stable tree, where as 2.5.x is the development tree. So definately go with 2.4 unless you want to learn about kernel hacking/development. The latest is 2.4.18.

[scanez]

2.5.25 is the latest development version, the latest stable version is 2.4.18. If you are using a kernel older than 2.4.18, you can upgrade to that if you want but I wouldn't try the development kernels unless you are planning on working on kernel development.

[GeoHoffman]

I guess I have the latest kernel then so it will be a while before I have to learn. Thanks for the info,

-Geo

[gig2k1s]

You can still recompile if you wanted though. You may need to add a feature that by default isnt't enabled, or you might just want to slim down the default kernel. Either way.

[Ahimsa]

I'm using the vmlinuz 2.4.7-10. The default kernel that shipped with RH7.2. I know that there are plenty of docs on recompiling the kernel and also on upgrading, but I'm a little hesitant of messing with the core of the machine without being really sure what it is that I'm doing given that Murphy's Law seems to have been thought up with Linux in mind :D !!
Can someone direct me to some good intro or entry-level kernel docs. Also, how does one know when the kernel requires attention, and are the improvement sin speed really that noticeable and worth the effort of compiling?

[Radar]

Only necessary to recompile your kernel or compile a new kernel when you need to enable a feature you don't currently have. In other words, you'll know when it's time. But some want to do it just to be able to say that they're running the most recent kernel. Nothing wrong with that either. It's good practice. Be aware that you can have multiple kernels to choose from on one machine and switch between them as needed. Especially handy for a first time attempt. Look at the NHF's - plenty of good tutorials right on this site.

[furrycat]

There's nothing wrong with running an unstable kernel. They may have some cool new feature or an improved driver for your hardware.

Give it a try; you might learn something.

[GeoHoffman]

Are drivers really part of the kernel? I always though that on the top level you have programs. They interface with the operating system (ie the kernel), the kernel interfaces with the drivers and the drivers interface with the hardware.
If a driver is part of the kernel does that mean I have to wait for a version of the kernel that supports my sound card to get it working?

[fancypiper]

2.4.19 I believe is the latest stable. At least, I'm running that in Gentoo and they say it is.

[Radar]

Originally posted by GeoHoffman
Are drivers really part of the kernel?

Basically, yes

If a driver is part of the kernel does that mean I have to wait for a version of the kernel that supports my sound card to get it working?

No, you can leave the ability for the kernel to be able to load modules. Then, you would build the module (when it becomes available) and load it.

[fancypiper]

I wish they would toss that post new thread button at the bottom of a post. It sucks!

I made a larger than usual /boot partition so I could have a bunch of kernel releases/configurations to play with. Just keep a kernel you know is solid.

Try 'em. You might like them. I know you will learn a lot.

Breaking and fixing is how you learn linux.

[johnrabbit]

i am a newbie trying to find out where i can buy a set of traing vhs video tapes at a low price, and has any one used (spidertools.com )and how would rate them

[mingshun]

Originally posted by GeoHoffman
Are drivers really part of the kernel? I always though that on the top level you have programs. They interface with the operating system (ie the kernel), the kernel interfaces with the drivers and the drivers interface with the hardware.
If a driver is part of the kernel does that mean I have to wait for a version of the kernel that supports my sound card to get it working?

Most newbies (including myself :p) always thought that their
kernel doesn't have the module that supports their hardware
whereas it is NOT the case (it is already there).

/* I almost went to upgrade my kernel thinking that kernel 2.2.4
doesn't have the sound card drivers that I want. Luckily,
some seniors (in my school, not here) told me about
linux-laptop website ...
*/

What sound card are you using?
Try your luck in
http://www.linuxhardwaredatabase.com/

[flippantfig]

I updated the kernel in my redhat quite easily, but it is a really good idea to save the .config file to somewhere safe (like /root) so that if your new kernel version has bits missing that you realise after the compile you need, you can go back and update it without having to choose everything again. This happened with me and soundcards, ramdisks, usb..... *ahem*

[fancypiper]

make oldconfig will do that.