LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Latest LQ Deals
Home Forums Tutorials Articles Register
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Debian
User Name
Password
Debian This forum is for the discussion of Debian Linux.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 11-30-2009, 10:49 PM   #1
frenchn00b
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2007
Location: E.U., Mountains :-)
Distribution: Debian, Etch, the greatest
Posts: 2,561

Rep: Reputation: 57
Debian & old pc: Can we PLEASE have a 2.4 series or best 2.4.31 kernel in BACKPORTS?


Hello

Debian Backports Stable ingenious and beloved coders, please help us again !!!

Please Please

Greetings
http://backports.org/dokuwiki/doku.php
 
Old 11-30-2009, 10:52 PM   #2
frenchn00b
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2007
Location: E.U., Mountains :-)
Distribution: Debian, Etch, the greatest
Posts: 2,561

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 57
I do not understand. Is this 2.4 kernel new, somebdy thought about old pc?
before it wasnt there
shall I try it or better wait for 2.4.31?
I note there is not linux-headers 2.4

Last edited by frenchn00b; 01-05-2010 at 11:10 PM.
 
Old 11-30-2009, 11:30 PM   #3
craigevil
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Location: OZ
Distribution: Debian Sid/RPIOS
Posts: 4,887
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534
2.4 was Sarge, even etch has 2.6.18. You might be able to use something like DSL. 2.4.18 was woody.
Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian#Kernels

How ancient is your system that you need a 2.4 kernel?
 
Old 11-30-2009, 11:31 PM   #4
frenchn00b
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2007
Location: E.U., Mountains :-)
Distribution: Debian, Etch, the greatest
Posts: 2,561

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigevil View Post
2.4 was Sarge, even etch has 2.6.18. You might be able to use something like DSL. 2.4.18 was woody.
Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian#Kernels

How ancient is your system that you need a 2.4 kernel?
pentium 166MHZ wiht low memory 64MB
 
Old 11-30-2009, 11:48 PM   #5
evo2
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2009
Location: Japan
Distribution: Mostly Debian and CentOS
Posts: 6,724

Rep: Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705
Your system is "old", but why do you want to use a 2.4 kernel?

Evo2.
 
Old 12-01-2009, 12:59 AM   #6
frenchn00b
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2007
Location: E.U., Mountains :-)
Distribution: Debian, Etch, the greatest
Posts: 2,561

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by evo2 View Post
Your system is "old", but why do you want to use a 2.4 kernel?

Evo2.
2.6 is ultra slow. I tried
 
Old 12-01-2009, 01:05 AM   #7
evo2
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2009
Location: Japan
Distribution: Mostly Debian and CentOS
Posts: 6,724

Rep: Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705Reputation: 1705
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchn00b View Post
2.6 is ultra slow. I tried
How do you know that it is the kernel that is making your system slow?
What config options did you try when you built the the 2.6 kernel?

Have you tried building a 2.4 kernel yet?
Why do you think an older kernel will be faster? Or do you just want to check and see?

So many questions!

Cheers,

Evo2.
 
Old 12-04-2009, 02:27 AM   #8
blufire
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Japan
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 148

Rep: Reputation: 16
couldnt you try to re-compile with less modules if you think it is the kernel
 
Old 12-04-2009, 04:12 AM   #9
jens
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Belgium
Distribution: Debian, Slackware, Fedora
Posts: 1,465

Rep: Reputation: 299Reputation: 299Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchn00b View Post
2.6 is ultra slow. I tried
What do you mean with "slow"? (64MB is more than enough for 2.6)
If it's the boot time, just recompile and disable everything you don't need with "menuconfig".

2.4 isn't supported in Lenny because it would break all applications using the epoll() call from a 2.6 kernel.

Last edited by jens; 12-04-2009 at 04:16 AM.
 
Old 01-05-2010, 11:16 PM   #10
frenchn00b
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2007
Location: E.U., Mountains :-)
Distribution: Debian, Etch, the greatest
Posts: 2,561

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by jens View Post
What do you mean with "slow"? (64MB is more than enough for 2.6)
If it's the boot time, just recompile and disable everything you don't need with "menuconfig".

2.4 isn't supported in Lenny because it would break all applications using the epoll() call from a 2.6 kernel.
It therefore means that to have a 2.4 kernel with squeeze it shall be own made distro or using woody (and its archive repositories).

If one install squeeze with the minimal (130mb-300mb) (no packages and no bin utils), could I take this squeeze install and build a 2.4.31 kernel (make) and then use the pc as normally apt-get install (if epoll() problem override)

Another point:
Slackware offers 2.4 kernels for the regular distro (the last one).
How can it be explained? What about the epol() issue of debian and why it is not the case for slackware. Those 2 distros are linux, and run same apps. Debian has more packages, and it could be great that backports help us for old pc if it is possible. I would rather have a debian testing with lower light-weight kernel rather than DSL woody, if possible.



Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchn00b View Post
but in terms of security holes, isnt it that risky to use distro with lower version of softwares? Like damn small linux, it is with a lower kernel, so more security holes... no? certainly that I will be wrong again ...
Sadly, I do agree with that
Small distributions with Linux 2.4 are not that actively maintained and do have more security issues.

Last edited by frenchn00b; 01-05-2010 at 11:39 PM.
 
Old 01-06-2010, 06:51 AM   #11
jens
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Belgium
Distribution: Debian, Slackware, Fedora
Posts: 1,465

Rep: Reputation: 299Reputation: 299Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchn00b View Post
It therefore means that to have a 2.4 kernel with squeeze it shall be own made distro or using woody (and its archive repositories).
No. Linux 2.4 is supported till Etch.
All backports.org kernels will work fine for that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchn00b View Post
If one install squeeze with the minimal (130mb-300mb) (no packages and no bin utils), could I take this squeeze install and build a 2.4.31 kernel (make) and then use the pc as normally apt-get install (if epoll() problem override)
Yes. Only a few apps (mostly mysql and friends) use it.
Just avoid them or rebuild from source (src-deb).

Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchn00b View Post
Another point:
Slackware offers 2.4 kernels for the regular distro (the last one).
How can it be explained?
What about the epol() issue of debian and why it is not the case for slackware. Those 2 distros are linux, and run same apps.
Do they?
If their binaries support epoll (as they should), they will break as well.
Most Slackware users use their own binaries.

Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchn00b View Post
Debian has more packages, and it could be great that backports help us for old pc if it is possible. I would rather have a debian testing with lower light-weight kernel rather than DSL woody, if possible.
Backports is only for newer software and could already use some extra man-power for just that alone.
backports.org will never add packages (including linux) that could break a stable release.

Default kernels are always meant to suite as many people as possible.
Did you try stripping a 2.6 kernel? It shouldn't cause any problems and is probably even faster.

Your kernel shouldn't be your bottle-neck here...

Last edited by jens; 01-06-2010 at 07:25 AM.
 
Old 01-06-2010, 10:58 AM   #12
mudangel
Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Ohio
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 267

Rep: Reputation: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchn00b View Post
Another point:
Slackware offers 2.4 kernels for the regular distro (the last one).
How can it be explained?
Slackware hasn't used a 2.4 kernel since 11.0(~2006?); even that had a 2.6 kernel available.
 
  


Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The default Lenny kernel, of stable, sucks. Alternatives from backports? frenchn00b Debian 10 03-26-2009 05:37 PM
problem with dma after installing kernel-2.6-15 from backports mechmg93 Debian 2 04-05-2006 02:30 PM
Cisco 350 Series on Debian kernel 2.6.8-2-686 i0l0l0s Linux - Wireless Networking 5 03-24-2005 05:49 PM
[Debian unstable & kernel 2.6] no network -DomiNator2k3- Linux - Networking 1 06-05-2004 04:11 AM
debian woody & 2.4.19 kernel qanopus Linux - General 5 11-28-2002 07:04 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Debian

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:35 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration