Home	Forums	What's new	Resources

Linux: Updating a Kernel

mtxblau - Feb 3, 2004

		mtxblau		Feb 3, 2004
			I've never done anything of this nature before so I just want to know how well it'd work before I actually destroyed anything. I have a copy of RH 5.2 (boxed version) that I used only once. To my recollection, it was very fast. Now the question is, if I were to install that then update the kernel (what's it at now, 2.4?) and get the requisite drivers, how much of performance difference would it make? It's a fairly nebulous question I know. I've used Linux on and off for a couple years now, but never anything more than regular everyday use (aka never bothered to compile/recompile - let things stay as they are). This has nothing to do with that file server question from before. And I've looked at a lot of Linux sites but nothing explicitly states what kind of difference it would make. Just a matter of experimentation. Thanks in advance!

		it290		Feb 3, 2004
			Well, it depends on what kernel you're using. The kernel I use has a lot of scheduling and performance enhancements over the vanilla kernel (mainly the ac patches). Most people (including myself) are using the 2.4 kernel, but the latest stable version is 2.6.1. RedHat 5.2 is probably 2.2 if I remember correctly. I don't think you'll see much of a speed increase at all by using a newer kernel _unless_ you include some of the optional tweaks. If anything, things will probably be slower. With that said, if you want to upgrade, I'd recommend installing a newer distro altogether. 5.2 is extremely outdated and probably won't support most of your hardware, and upgrading the kernel over a 5.2 install is probably more trouble than it's worth. It's also not supported by RedHat anymore, so you won't be able to download new rpms or anything. Filesystem support in the kernel has also changed a lot since then -no one runs ext2 anymore (except on legacy systems)- ext3 and reiserfs have taken over as the mainstream fs's. Having been screwed over by a number of different filesystems in the past, I really recommend reiser, as it hasn't failed me yet. What type of machine were you planning to run this on?

		antime		Feb 3, 2004
			Redhat 5.2 uses kernel 2.0 (it's *very* old). You'll probably have to update a bunch of packages that depend on certain old functionality that has changed and you'll have to update a bunch of *other* packages to get rid of all security holes that have been found during the last six years. IIRC the distro also ships with the egcs 1.x compiler which may have trouble compiling the latest kernels. As for performance, some things have improved greatly, but many of those improvements are not too noticeable on your typical single-user desktop machine but other things are (eg O(1) scheduler gives better interactive performance). Conversely you'll probably see performance degradation in other areas, especially if you're planning on using a machine from 1998 as well.

		mtxblau		Feb 4, 2004
			Well, that answers that question. Actually, I've come into a modicum of good luck, and acquired a 20GB HD which will allow me to install any version of Linux + have tons of space for my files. Right now I have only a 6GB space for major documents, now it will be foreseeable 17+GB. Thanks again! Now, what to do with this copy of Linux...

		it290		Feb 4, 2004
			Throw it in the trash. Seriously. I have several 'official' RH cd's laying around, and I haven't used any of them for years. You're much better off just downloading a more modern distro.