🚀 go-pugleaf

They need to do this for the same reason microsoft does, to give as many
users as possible a working experience.

(Try 2.2-prex kernels, they sped up my machine even more)

--

--
Gavin Cato - Optus Network Engineer - gavin@optus.net.au

gawk; talk; date; wine; grep; touch; unzip; touch; gasp; finger; gasp;
mount; \
 fsck; more; yes; gasp; umount; make clean; make mrproper; sleep


Jason Stokes <jstok@SPAMBLOCKED.apana.org.au> wrote in message
news:77ap4d$7vf$3@reader1.reader.news.ozemail.net...
>I just recompiled my kernel after two-three months of sticking with the
>default kernel provided with Red Hat 5.1.  I was gradually becoming
>aware of a subtle slowdown in my system, and wondered if a bloated
>kernel was the culprit.  As it happened, I noticed the default kernel
>in the Red Hat distribution has *all kinds of junk* in it, including
>allocating memory for a ramdisk!  When I compiled a custom kernel, my
>computer *flied*!
>
>It's strange that just recompiling the kernel could make so much
>difference.  My question is: why does the Red Hat distribution ship
>such a bloated kernel image?  Is the assumption that you'll just
>compile a custom one anyway?
>
>--
>Jason Stokes: jstok@bluedog.apana.org.au