Kernal 2.6

slinkysteve · 06-14-2005, 09:24 AM

Hi,

I've got the latest version of debian (3.1r0a I think) and have the option of installing it either as regular (2.4 kernal) or with the 2.6 kernal.

Is it worth installing it with the 2.6 kernal rather than going for the regual installation and what advantages would I have in installing the 2.6 version?

Thanks

Steve

lowpingnoob · 06-14-2005, 09:51 AM

dont trust me on this, but I would use the newest kernel, then if it doesn't work, try the older one. Also, is that the newest version for your distro?

harken · 06-14-2005, 09:51 AM

The 2.6 kernel is newer and it's more likely you'll get more of the newer hardware recognized than a 2.4 one.
But it's ok to install with the 2.4 kernel and then apt-get the latest version from Debian.

Oh, and BTW, it's spelled k-e-r-n-e-l, not kernal.

slinkysteve · 06-14-2005, 10:23 AM

Nice one. Thanks

foo_bar_foo · 06-14-2005, 04:09 PM

2.6 kernel is ALOT faster than the old one due to better scheduling and better memory management

mohit dhawan · 06-15-2005, 12:32 AM

i think 2.6 is better since it will let u mount ntfs easily.
2.4 moght require some extra modules

bretticus · 06-15-2005, 12:50 AM

I found it interesting that the Sarge install option for kernel 2.6x didn't seem to have support for my Perc4 RAID controller where the 2.4x version did. So I'm with the guy who mentioned something like, if it works, use it