lucid and 2.6.33?

[Patrick Goetz]

Flávio Etrusco wrote:
> 
> Seriously? Ubuntu is not only about techies, it's about general
> use(rs) and businesses too. They have to have a solid and well-tested
> base.
> If you really wanna know what you're actually getting, you have the
> sources and the changelogs.
> 

It's not clear to me how a handful of folks at Canonical or RedHat 
splicing and dicing kernel code from one version into another 
necessarily gives you greater stability than an officially released 
kernel that has been thoroughly tested by thousands of kernel hackers....

But you're right, I can always just compile my own kernel, and the most 
stable kernels I've used are ones I compiled from kernel.org source. 
But then I have worry about doing all my own security patches and 
maintenance until such time as I upgrade the distro.  Or I can pour over 
the Ubuntu kernel source package diffs in my spare time hoping to figure 
out if some feature has been backported.  Allow me to cut to the chase 
and declare my original question to unsatisfactorily addressed.