LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices


View Poll Results: Do you build your own kernel?
Yes 23 35.94%
No 24 37.50%
Depends 17 26.56%
Voters: 64. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 03-30-2008, 07:32 AM   #16
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285

What about those who said no ... they seem to be equal in number to the others and yet they have not posted reasons ...
 
Old 03-30-2008, 08:10 AM   #17
crashmeister
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2002
Distribution: t2 - trying to anyway
Posts: 2,541

Rep: Reputation: 47
If somebody doesn't it's likely he never did and might not know what you'd do that for.

I used to build my own kernels years ago when there where a lot of patches outside the kernel tree I needed to get my hardware to work but don't see much sense in it now.

It's just boring with all the options now and then you get a new piece of hardware you figured you'd never use or somebody shows up with some piece and you have to rebuild the kernel.Otherwise you'd have to build all the modules anyway and thats pretty much what the distros do.

If you are severly restrited with RAM or need a patch it makes sense other than that I don't see a reason to do it.
 
Old 03-30-2008, 09:01 AM   #18
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285Reputation: 1285
Well I usually leave most of the modules in there just in case I change the hardware out, although on a laptop this is less likely. But, mostly there are things you can do to improve performance and reduce bugginess as I said before. And if I apply patches it's only to upgrade to a newer kernel version.
 
Old 04-01-2008, 07:14 AM   #19
LaughingBoy
Member
 
Registered: May 2006
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Distribution: Fedora 6-17 x64 / Ubuntu 10.x x64
Posts: 95

Rep: Reputation: 16
I used to too - the additional performance was noticeable. Now... with new kernels being released for current distros every month or so, it's more work than I care for with the number of systems that I look after. The default ones work just fine. Not ideal, with smeg loads of unnecessary options and drivers, but that's the Windows(TM) world, really.
 
Old 04-01-2008, 11:50 AM   #20
Hevoos
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Oct 2007
Distribution: Debian Lenny, Slackware 12
Posts: 22

Rep: Reputation: 15
I haven't done it yet, but I guess I should since my computer isn't too new. On better machines I don't think it's worth it (Slackware already has good kernels and Debian kernels needs too many patches, I'm not sure about the last one though).
 
Old 04-01-2008, 12:44 PM   #21
xri
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2002
Distribution: Slackware 14.2, Archlinux
Posts: 283
Blog Entries: 11

Rep: Reputation: 41
As a matter of principle, I don't think my installation job is done until I compile the kernel. However, I don't always have the time. For me, it's all about learning more about Linux and computers in general and having more computing power at the end of the day.
 
Old 04-02-2008, 08:06 AM   #22
jtshaw
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2000
Location: Seattle, WA USA
Distribution: Ubuntu @ Home, RHEL @ Work
Posts: 3,892
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 67
Building my custom kernel used to be an early step in every Linux install I ever did... Now days it seems only in very rare cases I ever have to do it.

I really think the change in development process is the biggest reason.

Back in the 2.2 days and 2.4 days the new features used to sit in the development branches for a long time before they were ever built into the stable kernel. Often times, especially with machines with the latest hardware, it seemed I was constantly trying to backport features and or using kernels others had customized because some feature I wanted wasn't yet available in the stable releases. Now days the development cycles are a lot shorter, new features get into the stable releases much faster. You'll notice even the distribution maintainers have had to do a lot less back porting or supplying of patches that haven't been accepted in the 2.6 days.
 
Old 04-02-2008, 09:06 AM   #23
mikieboy
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Warrington, Cheshire, UK
Distribution: Linux Mint 12 LXDE
Posts: 555

Rep: Reputation: 33
I've been compiling since the 2.4 kernel to dispose of unwanted bloat but it wasn't strictly necessary.

I've recently bought a graphics tablet for which the driver is included in the 2.6.23 kernel so I'll be compiling that to get the tablet working. Would this driver hotplug? I don't actually know so I'm tempted to answer yes but ...... WDYT?
 
Old 04-02-2008, 10:30 PM   #24
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 7,151

Rep: Reputation: 2203Reputation: 2203Reputation: 2203Reputation: 2203Reputation: 2203Reputation: 2203Reputation: 2203Reputation: 2203Reputation: 2203Reputation: 2203Reputation: 2203
If I were using a binary distribution, then no, I wouldn't compile my own kernel. I would consider that one of the major reasons why I chose to use "somebody's 'distro'" is so that the distro-producers would do all the heavy-lifting for me. I'd use their kernel, their environment, their library choices ... and basically just focus on whatever it is that I wanted to do.

In particular, I don't want incompatibility to raise its very-ugly head. I don't want things "not to work." Again, that's one of the devil's-bargains that go with a binary distribution: it's going to work, and it's going to work well-enough.

Now, as it happens, I do happen to run a Linux distribution (Gentoo) that is completely compiled-from-source. Everything, from the kernel right up to every single library that's installed, has been compiled from-source using compile-options specific to my particular (somewhat .. okay, okay, make that very .. antiquated ) hardware.

My kernel, in fact my entire system, contains exactly what I need and exactly what my hardware needs and nothing more. But it wasn't easy and I wouldn't wish it upon you, especially since I am writing in the Linux - Newbie forum! It is not, in other words, "the time nor the place."
 
Old 04-03-2008, 12:11 AM   #25
3rods
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Posts: 70

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 16
It just seems like a lot of work (finding drivers and all) and time. I'm going to guess I'll screw up the first..er..three tries or so before I have a working system.

I tried to add HDAPS support to my Ubuntu kernel a few months ago and I totally screwed that kernel up. Things were broken all over. (and I don't remember if I actually got it to work either.)

Plus, it took a good two hours to compile. A long time to wait only to realize you're a tool and you don't know what you're doing.
 
Old 04-03-2008, 12:38 AM   #26
LaughingBoy
Member
 
Registered: May 2006
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Distribution: Fedora 6-17 x64 / Ubuntu 10.x x64
Posts: 95

Rep: Reputation: 16
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3rods View Post
Plus, it took a good two hours to compile. A long time to wait only to realize you're a tool and you don't know what you're doing.
That's called "learning" ;-)
 
Old 04-03-2008, 05:20 AM   #27
mikieboy
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Warrington, Cheshire, UK
Distribution: Linux Mint 12 LXDE
Posts: 555

Rep: Reputation: 33
Originally posted by sundialsvcs:
Quote:
My kernel, in fact my entire system, contains exactly what I need and exactly what my hardware needs and nothing more. But it wasn't easy and I wouldn't wish it upon you,
I ran Gentoo for about 6 months and man it was tortuous. Installing a package was like waiting for paint to dry and updating the system took about ten hours of compiling. But yes, Gentoo absolutely requires that you compile your own kernel. But are all those use flags necessary and does a possible increase in speed make it all worthwhile? Well that's what choice is all about!
 
Old 04-03-2008, 05:39 AM   #28
crashmeister
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2002
Distribution: t2 - trying to anyway
Posts: 2,541

Rep: Reputation: 47
Gentoo requires that you compile your kernel but not that you configure it.You can use genkernel and then you'll know why some poeple whine about how long it takes to compile a kernel :-)
 
Old 04-15-2008, 07:09 PM   #29
GrapefruiTgirl
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Dec 2006
Location: underground
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 7,594

Rep: Reputation: 551Reputation: 551Reputation: 551Reputation: 551Reputation: 551Reputation: 551
When I choose to upgrade to a newer kernel, I copy my running .config file into the new source location, make xconfig, and then zoom through it looking for any brand new options I want to try out.

Initially, (my answer is YES- build my own, anyhow) I always have built my own kernel since learning how to do it. It takes me like 10 minutes from start to reboot now, if I am simply upgrading. I build my own by default because I like knowing that I haven't missed out on maybe a new option that better supports a specific piece of hardware I have, and also I remove all the stuff I don't need.
Examples of the hardware are:
1) my Realtek 8211 ethernet device -- is not specifically (numerically) supported, though the forcedeth driver (for other Realtek devices) works fine. One day I'll see in the config my exact device, and select it if necessary/possible.
2) until support for the Fintek SuperIO chip I have, entered the mainline kernel, I was needing to manually add the driver source code to the kernel source, edit makefiles, and build it; or else I couldn't read my hardware monitor device. Nowadays, my Fintek device is specifically in there.

Also as an example, I like selecting my own timer/tick speed, specific CPU, & memory model (64GB -- not the default) otherwise I would not have the performance & functionality from my hardware that I do, let alone limiting myself to using less memory than I have installed (4GB).

Sasha
 
Old 04-15-2008, 07:26 PM   #30
SqdnGuns
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2005
Distribution: Slackware64 14.2 w/ CSB & MSB
Posts: 998

Rep: Reputation: 96
I always roll my own kernel's. Why have all that built in crap that is not needed for your box? From the lilo menu to log in, it take 28 seconds to be at my desktop.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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
kernel panic after building custom kernel for macbook sparrott Linux - Laptop and Netbook 1 06-29-2007 06:06 PM
Building kernel module from multiple source file in 2.6 kernel yogeshwar_s Programming 1 12-20-2004 10:31 AM
Problems building a simple kernel module for kernel 2.6.7 atticman Linux - Software 2 12-13-2004 04:35 PM
Building Linux kernel with 2.6 ( kernel ) raees Linux - General 1 03-16-2004 05:44 PM
Building kernel mods for an existing kernel ugenn Linux - Software 2 10-06-2003 02:25 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:39 AM.

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
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration