On Mon, 25 Sep 2006, chrism at imntv.com wrote: > Steph wrote: > > > I currently have a few CentOs 4.X servers running the latest stock > > 2.6.9-42.0.2.ELsmp kernel. > > > > I notice kernel.org are now up to version 2.6.18 and many people are using > > the 2.6.17.11 > > > > Does anyone have any opinions with regards to the 17.11 and .18 kernels? > > I'm led to believe the latest centos stock kernels are the same anyway as > > are the backported Redhat ones. > > There is nothing really "wrong" with using a newer kernel. It just requires > more work on your part. The beauty of the stock binaries (including the > kernel) is that you can simply type "yum update blah" and know with a fairly > high degree of certainty that the system will continue to work, that relevant > security fixes have been maintained, dependencies with other programs > maintained, etc. If you roll your own kernel from more recent virginal > source, it is still likely to work fine, but you will have to mind all those > other issues yourself. Unless you have some device that isn't working > properly with the stock kernel, it probably isn't worth the hassle of doing > things yourself. Actually, it might be very wrong to run a newer kernel. Sometimes interfaces with the kernel change and tools/libraries need to be updated to accomodate this change. You' cannot be sure of that unless you have a good understanding of those changes. (Especially for enterprise/production usage) The fact that you ask that question is probably a good indication for me to advise not to change from a CentOS supported kernel. (unless you know what you're doing but since you did ask the question... :)) Kind regards, -- dag wieers, dag at wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]