Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] Compiling information - totally [OT]
From: Josh Green (jgreen_AT_users.sourceforge.net)
Date: Wed Sep 19 2001 - 05:36:49 EEST
On Tue, 18 Sep 2001 18:28:10 -0400
Rob <kudla_AT_pobox.com> wrote:
> At 06:17 PM 9/18/01 +0200, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> >while that may be true, you're missing an integral part
> of the *FUN*
> >of linux. :-D
>
> I experienced that 'fun' about a hundred times from
> 1993-1995, thank you!
>
> Actually, in all seriousness, I had to do it again a
> couple years ago for a
> client's unhappy Caldera box and discovered it hadn't
> become any less time
> consuming or annoying as I rolled on out of there at 1am.
> I figured my
> Slack-running friends just kept doing it out of habit; I
> had no idea it was
> supposed to be 'fun' but rather 'indicative Linux still
> needs work to be
> usable by most people'.
>
These days I don't think it is really that necessary. Most
distributions compile just about everything as modules so
the only real reason I can think of for recompiling the
Linux kernel is to use a low-latency patch (perhaps
distributions will provide a version of that in the future).
I still compile it myself as I do like keeping up with the
latest 2.4.x version, using Andrew Morton's low latency
patch, and having a trimmed down optimized kernel. I've done
it so many times now it really doesn't take all that long as
most options are in a rather sane default state (admittedly
it does take some experience to know what all those options
are though) and one can always use the same ".config" file
from a previous compile.
Josh Green
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Sep 19 2001 - 05:28:16 EEST