[LAU] 64-bit kernel 3.x deb package?

[Ken Restivo]

On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 12:41:00PM -0400, S. Massy wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 12:46:38PM +0200, Robin Gareus wrote:
> > On 08/07/2012 10:47 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 13:39 -0700, Ken Restivo wrote:
> > >> Interesting, well I've already exceeded my time budget for "while I've
> > >> got this thing on, I wonder if there's a 64-bit kernel for it".
> > > 
> > > You should build your own kernel-rt. In the end this might be less time
> > > consuming. On my machine it takes around 90 minutes with an Athlon
> > > 2.1GHz dual-core, 4GB RAM, CONCURRENCY_LEVEL=2.
> > >
> > 
> > The compile time is not even 1% of what it takes.
> > 
> > Tweaking the config, knowing and learning about the effects of all the
> > kernel parameters, how they interact and affect the system is a
> > never-ending task. It is very easy to screw it up, too.
> > 
> > IMHO it is much wiser to spend the time to contribute to a community effort.
> > 
> > Sure, you can tweak the kernel to your personal system and preferences
> > when you roll your own. You can learn a lot by doing that and it can be
> > fun, too.
> > 
> > At 64studio we've learned that the actual performance difference
> > regarding options that are relevant only to one system vs options that
> > are suitable for a distributions are minimal. Debian continues that
> > effort. ..and you get updates.
> I totally agree. I've been compiling my own kernels since 2.0.x, both for
> fun and because, especially at the time, size and speed mattered.
> However, as the kernel grew in intricacy, especially so in the last
> couple years, the trade-off between time investment and
> performance/reliability seems to have swung on the debit side of the
> pocketbook. This especially became clear to me when I worked on
> compiling a kernel for my new netbook in hopes of improving battery-life
> only to see my custom kernels consistently drain *more* power than the
> Debian stock kernel. In the end, the time spent configuring the system
> itself was far more effective, and I have a nagging suspicion that it
> may prove to be the same with RT performance.
> 

Well I upgraded that box to Wheezy, and indeed an RT kernel is right there, already baked in! And it works too!

I think it's a huge step forward to have RT kernels already in a major distribution (arguably one of the most major, considering how many are based upon it).

I haven't used it for music stuff (and don't have any plans to), but everything just works, so if I needed to do any audio stuff, it's there.

Thanks for the answer.

-ken