Find the answer to your Linux question:
Results 1 to 2 of 2
...compiling a 2.6 kernel for a 486? or should i stick to a 2.4 kernel? thanks /weed...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #1
    Linux Enthusiast Weedman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Tasmania, Australia
    Posts
    640

    is it worth...


    ...compiling a 2.6 kernel for a 486?

    or should i stick to a 2.4 kernel?

    thanks
    /weed
    "Time has more than one meaning, and is more than one dimension" - /.unknown
    --Registered Linux user #396583--

  2. #2
    Linux Guru dylunio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Cymru
    Posts
    4,157
    I see nothing wrong with compiling the 2.6.* kernel for a 486 processor.

    You can put both the new kernel as well as the old kernel in /boot and have two options to boot: the 2.4.* kernel and the 2.6.* kernel - so if you don't like the newer kernel you can always use the old one.

    As for "Is it worth it?", I'd say yes since the newer kernel has more active development and will tend to support more features and hardware. If you don't see yourself needing these extras you can just stick with the older kernel (as long as you update the 2.4.* to the latest in the 2.4.* as often as possible).

    dylunio
    Registered Linux User #371543!
    Get force-get May The Source Be With You
    /dev/null
    /dev/null2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •