[linux-audio-user] what window manager are you using?

[Erik Steffl]

Lee Revell wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-08-12 at 12:05, Russell Hanaghan wrote:
> 
>>And now, darn it...you got me thinking I should try! Are there any
>>advantages to compiling and leaving out the bunches of crap I don't ever
>>use that are built in the kernel? Like resources, memory, speed savings
>>of any sort?
>>
> 
> 
> No, absolutely not.  99.99% of Linux users should use their vendor's
> kernel.  It has undergone a LOT more stability testing than whatever you
> would compile off of kernel.org.
> 
> You should only use a kernel.org kernel if you need some feature or
> driver that your vendor's kernel does not provide, or, obviously, if you
> are hacking the kernel.  If you go this route you should attempt to
> build a binary package for your distribution, then install that.  This
> way you can post the packages somewhere, and other people who need a
> custom kernel for their own purposes can just download your packages vs.
> repeating all that work.

   I think he was asking a different Q: he was asking about advantages 
of using compiled as opposed to pre-built kernel, you are comparing 
distro kernel to vanilla kernel.

   IMO: in general I think it makes sense to compile kernel because you 
get exactly what you need plus you can experiment with different setting 
to see if you get better performance etc. I tend to use the kernel 
source package for my distro (mostly because it can build a package that 
can be installed, which takes care of having LILO option to boot former 
kernel etc.)

	erik