[Nottingham] Kernels 2.4 vs 2.6

Martin martin at ml1.co.uk
Fri May 4 13:03:31 BST 2007

Cam wrote:
> Martin
>> So why would "2.4" still be used rather than "2.6" other than for
>> historical systems?
> It could be used for embedded systems, for example if the architecture
> isn't mainstream so isn't well supported in 2.6, or if the product
> includes devices with third-party device drivers that are only provided
> for 2.4.x kernels
> Also if you have many hours of testing and development behind a product
> with 2.4.x built in, you need a very compelling reason to move to 2.6
> with all the associated development work, re-testing, and support of
> deployed devices that will still be running 2.4.x

Thanks, that confirms the "historical" bit.

I was just wondering if there was some present day technical or
performance reason such as scheduler or architecture or whatever that
might favour the old 2.4 kernel still.


Martin Lomas
martin at ml1.co.uk

More information about the Nottingham mailing list