On Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 09:04:28AM +0700, Jundi wrote:

Hi,

> I think Owl Linux is very similiar to OpenBSD in BSD world.
>
> But not ready for kernel v2.4 yet. At least modutils and e2fsprog aren't
> fulfill kernel v2.4 requirements.

You're right.

> Public opinion says the v2.4 of linux kernel more robust (performance) than
> v2.2. I share that also.

The difference is hardly noticeable with most practical uses.

> At last, is there possibilities to use v2.4 on Owl?

Not yet (unless you update the relevant packages yourself, of course,
in which case it won't be official Owl). You'll have to wait a few
kernel revisions more.

For us, the significant difference between 2.2 and 2.4 at the moment
is that I haven't reviewed 2.4 kernels for my usual set of potential
security issues, yet. I did that to 2.2 between 2.2.9 and 2.2.13, and
as you could have noticed this has resulted in 2.2.13 fixing quite a
few security issues. I have no reasons to expect 2.4 is in a much
better condition now. We've already seen several security fixes that
were applied to 2.2 over a year ago still missing in recent 2.4's and
finally getting applied just now. The ELF loader integer signedness
and overflow issues are a recent example. We had them fixed back with
2.2.14-ow2 (January, 2000) and 2.2.15+. Now someone re-discovered
them still not fixed in 2.4 this July.

> I need this to be able read my raiserfs (v3.6) partitions and better
> support for my latest hardware.

That I can understand. I avoid using reiserfs, though.

-- 
/sd

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]