It's not so hard to understand, the question is when there is something that _has_ to be done by changing the kernel. Most people don't generally go around compiling for kicks (ok a few maybe do ;)), and pretty much all won't go down the route of compiling the kernel if there _is_ an alternative. For example, can you change the kernel frequency without? (think there are plans to approach that in future so you don't need to, but I believe currently it still needs a recompile). At that point, what do you do? Whether that means you should choose a different dist is fine if its needed, but thats a separate discussion really and has to be based on a users requirements. Ian On 4/2/06, Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists at hughesjr.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-04-02 at 06:50 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > > > There are hundreds of packages added to the CentOS kernel by the > ^^^^^^^^ > I meant "patches" > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQBEL7tmTKkMgmrBY7MRAr4hAJ4iR85RAvi+BhXp4QAex4DDyuJjxwCgl2NQ > o+kTbRGsBZlwKj3g9ZwVuAM= > =WQDo > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060402/15b26adc/attachment-0005.html>