Kernel Question

Gilles Gravier gilles at gravier.org
Thu Jun 19 04:56:26 UTC 2008


Hi!

(see inline)

Eric Morey wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-06-18 at 16:36 +0200, Gilles Gravier wrote:
>   
>> Paul,
>>
>> Paul Melvin wrote:
>>     
>>> Thanks mks,
>>>
>>> I dunno exactly what I am trying to do I suppose ;)
>>>
>>> I have just tried another disti before coming back to ubuntu and it was all
>>> do it yourself to get the best out, and after rolling quite a few kernels in
>>> that migratory phase I thought I could improve mine by rolling it
>>> specifically to suit my needs
>>>
>>> But do you think that it would make much difference?
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> General rule of thumb : If it ain't broke... don't fix it.
>>     
> Rules of thumb are not reliable, especially if you are trying to learn
> something. I say "break" and let us know what you run up against. That
> way we'll all learn something.
>   
Call it whatever you want. I'm just trying to point out to Paul that you 
don't rebuild a kernel just to do it. You do it for a good reason... as 
in "something's not perfect for me with the current one so I really NEED 
to do it".
>> Second general rule of thumb : Ubuntu kernel already includes a bunch of 
>> cool features
> True. But you'll probably learn a lot more about those features when you
> discover that you've rolled your kernal without it.
>   
Yes. Learning is good. But having a working, stable system is also.
>> Chances are, you're getting all you need with the "generic" kernel already.
>>     
> For most people I agree. But for someone curious enough to ask about
> compiling your own kernal, maybe not. 
>   
He didn't give the reasons. I'm making (from the "simple formulation" of 
his message) something along the lines of "I know you have to rebuild 
your own kernel to get a properly working Linux" type of assumption. My 
own assumption may be correct... but I have yet to hear that from Paul's 
words.
> Add 3) You don't mind running into problems, researching them learning
> how to fix them and probably learning more about ubuntu because it's
> fun. Isn't that what free software is about?
>   
Actually, no. Free software is about choice and liberties. (liberty to 
chose, tinker, redistribute... as well written elsewhere). But one of 
the main reasons people (normal users, not geeks and system 
administrators) use open source / free software, is for the high quality 
they get and because it "just works". Why put this whole user experience 
at risk unless there is a serious reason why you NEED to do it?

Gilles.

-- 





More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list