Daniel Pittman wrote: <snipped> > The OP didn't mention anything about boot time, though, and the most > commonly cited reason for a custom kernel (in my experience) is "speed", > where the poster assumes that a generic kernel must, necessarily, be > slower than a custom one.
That was my assumption as well. I was under the impression that if the kernel had less to sift through then it would be faster. Now that I'm looking at it I can see that, once booted, it is only using the modules that it needs. It would seem that compiling the kernel is only necessary if I had some kind of exotic hardware, although boot time gains can be had from a custom kernel. I'm still planning on learning how to build a custom kernel sometime in the near future, but right now it is not quite as important. Still, I would like to see exactly how fast I could get the laptop to go from GRUB to my FVWM-Crystal desktop. :) As a side note, A friend of mine installed Arch Linux on the laptop in an effort to lure me over to his camp. I really liked how fast it booted into X and how small the footprint seemed, but can't see any compelling reason to swap distros (mostly because I'm more comfortable using Debian I would guess). Preston -- Arrant Drivel - really, it's just trash... http://www.arrantdrivel.com/ Where the road takes me - a highwayman's perspective http://www.prestonboyington.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
