the venerable 2.0 kernel series

[David Nicol]

one review claimed that the 2.6 series is slower on old hardware.

I guess I'll set up old-style ext2 on the box in question and make
up some benchmarks.  Keeping open file descriptors below 256 should
not be that tough of a constraint, or I'll expand it... maybe not...

BSD 5.3 did not get along well at all with the 3c509 on the box in question,
perhaps BSD 4 or earlier would.

On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 11:18:24 -0600, Frank Wiles <frank at wiles.org> wrote:
>   From what I've seen the 2.0 and 2.2 series are only still being
>   maintained to help companies and users that for one reason or another
>   can't upgrade.  If I was starting a new project, server, etc I would
>   go with the latest and avoid the older kernels.
> 
>   Memory requirements are lower, hacking would be about the same, and
>   a bunch of limits.
> 
>   Unless you're trying to use an application that requires a 2.0 or 2.2
>   kernel or you're dealing in the embedded space I can't think of a
>   single advantage to using an older kernel.