V Thu, 28 Jul 2011 16:19:53 +0100
Gordan Bobic <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Yes, I thought 2.6.32.x
> > 2.6.32 is best choice for sysadmin's (used by all major
> > distributions)
> I think that is only a sensible course of action iif (if and only
> if) 2.6.38.x will NOT work on the major distributions. If 2.6.38.x
> will work on RHEL6 and whatever the latest version of stable Debian
> is, then I think it should be preferred to 2.6.32.x. Since a
> distro-patched kernel is unlikely to take a vanilla VServer patch
> anyway, sticking with the distro kernel seems like a wrong choice,
> considering that distro kernels (RHEL's at least) come with many,
> many fixes and updates from much later kernels applied.
> Provided that 2.6.38.x (or 3.0.x) work on the current stable
> distros, what specific disadvantage do you see in using 2.6.38.x
> instead of 2.6.32.x? It's not like one will be more supportable (in
> the sense of the main distro) than the other.
My (=sysadmin) reasons for:
+++ High stability. A huge number of servers use it. Years to fixing bugs.
+++ Support. Guaranteed support (bug fixes, security patches) for a long time.
- Newer HW support.
++ Newer drivers, better hardware support.
--- Unsupported. Big problems if a serious vulnerability found.
- Untested. A very small number of servers use it. It has probably
more bugs than LTS kernel's.
(sorry for my english)
Received on Thu Jul 28 17:18:36 2011