On Thu, 5 Nov 1998, Robert G. Brown wrote:
>
> I think that the point is that it is a moderate chore to upgrade a
> stable, functioning, 2.0.X operation into a stable, functioning 2.1.X
> operation. None of the main distributions (that I know of, anyway) come
> with 2.1.X as the main kernel, for the excellent reason that they need a
> kernel that runs on nearly any platform/hardware combination and will be
> pestered to death by owners where it doesn't work. From sitting on this
> list for years now, it is perfectly apparent that there are many
> hardware combinations where any given 2.1.X doesn't work, sometimes for
> no obvious reason. Then there are the hardware drivers, not all of
> which are as uniformly supported in 2.1.X as in 2.0.X (just from
> glancing over the hardware parts of the kernel config process). This is
> a moving target and I'm sure it has improved since I last looked, but
> again, Red Hat needs to have "universal" hardware support in a
> shrinkwrap linux distribution.
I installed redhat 5.0 (yes 5.0, not .2 or .1) on my notebook and
dropped 2.1.125 right in... only glitch I had to fix was to get the
new pppd as the distributed version breaks on kernels greater than
2.1.99 due to a bug in checking the version. Other than that, it
dropped right in, booted, and ran fine...
Doing this I can run 2.0.35 or 2.1.125 without changing a thing on this
machine now...
Bob
