- This topic has 20 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated Mar 25-12:37 pm by calciumsodium.
-
Posts
-
PPC
On my old HP 32bits laptop, I use kernel 5.X – and that old beast flies – just this week end I watched some full HD home videos on it, plugged to the TV. I use it for word processing (OpenOffice’s appimage just flies on it) and I browse the web with Seamonkey and an old Min Browser version.- the only things I can’t do with that setup is stuff that is really, really beyond it’s processing power (like watching DRM’ed video). I never had a single problem in the months it’s been running antiX 21, even after it was unpluged from power without shutting it down (the battery is dead)
Brian Masinick
From https://kernel.org/category/releases.html
Version Maintainer Released Projected EOL 6.1 Greg Kroah-Hartman & Sasha Levin 2022-12-11 Dec, 2026 5.15 Greg Kroah-Hartman & Sasha Levin 2021-10-31 Oct, 2026 5.10 Greg Kroah-Hartman & Sasha Levin 2020-12-13 Dec, 2026 5.4 Greg Kroah-Hartman & Sasha Levin 2019-11-24 Dec, 2025 4.19 Greg Kroah-Hartman & Sasha Levin 2018-10-22 Dec, 2024 4.14 Greg Kroah-Hartman & Sasha Levin 2017-11-12 Jan, 2024As I’ve said before, some people do well with the 5.10 kernel and it was known to fix a few difficult issues.
On the other hand, I know personally that the 5.10 kernel was also one of the most difficult kernels for
other systems, so while it apparently “fixed” some, it broke others that had otherwise worked for many years.Here’s a convenient location to grab kernels for anyone wanting to either build source or directly use
a tarball:
https://www.kernel.org/feeds/kdist.xmlTo me, the tree that needs OLD kernel support the most is the 32 bit tree.
For the 32 bit version – that’s the onethat we’ll have to work hard to keep running,
I think the 4.19 kernel would be a definite keeper, but I’m hoping some hacker
somewhere does some work beyond what kernel.org does and somehow keeps older,
unsupported kernels working. If yes, maybe that’s a potential solution.
Otherwise, when 4.19 support ceases, either the 5.4 or 5.10 kernel will have
to make due for those people. I’m concerned about what “Bookworm” changes will do to
impact that community, and for them, I think one of our legacy releases with lifespan
remaining may be their last place for “safe” use; after that, use those systems only
for simple work and avoid anything that needs to remain “secure”.--
Brian Masinick
sasa_
Will ISO antix 23, 32-bit available for testing?
seaken64
I use a lot of 32-bit machines. But I don’t think it will matter if it comes with 5.10 as default. We can just add the 4.19 kernel after the fact, right? I’m not very knowledgible on kernels. I do remember updating the kernel on an .iso I used to install MX-Fluxbox on a Pentium-III Coppermine. As long as I can do that with the new antiX version it should be fine for me if for some reason the 5.10 kernel doesn’t work.
Seaken64
anticapitalista
Will ISO antix 23, 32-bit available for testing?
When we get closer to release, yes.
Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.
antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.
calciumsodium
Hello,
I was wondering if you will consider creating 32-bit antiX 6.1 kernels for bookworm as well as for bullseye.
The reason I ask is because in my testing of both the antiX 23 alpha1 and beta1 test systems the 64-bit antiX 6.1 kernel tends to consistently outperform the antiX 5.10 kernel with the various browsers in terms of CPU consumption.
Even though the 6.1 kernels have a higher ram than the 5.10 or 4.19 kernels, that is not the only criteria for benchmarking.
There may be a chance that the 32-bit antiX 6.1 kernel will also outperform the 32- bit antiX 5.10 kernel.
This idea has yet to be tested.
Thank you for your consideration.
- This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by calciumsodium.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
