I really would like it if Wary could be built with just one kernel that suits everybody. Well, nearly everybody.

Wary is intended to support those on dialup, so I asked myself, what is the most recent kernel that will compile all the dialup drivers?

We have quite a collection of them. I know that half of them don't compile on the 2.6.32 kernel, and they do compile on the 2.6.30 kernel ( is used in Puppy 4.3.1).

So, that leaves the 2.6.31 kernel to investigate. The most recent is which was released July 2010 -- that is not long ago, so this kernel has been maintained until fairly recently and the changelogs show lots of good fixes have gone into it.

I compiled the kernel last night, then woke up at 2.30am, wasn't sleepy, so tested compiling the dialup drivers -- oh wow, every single one of them compiles!

So, is this "the one" for Wary? Heh heh, I don't know, but it is going to be very interesting to test it. I intend to bring out Wary 0.9.3 in a few days with this kernel.

I was wondering one thing. How difficult would it be to maintain a kernel ourselves? I mean, in the way that the long-term-supported 2.6.27 and 2.6.32 kernels are maintained, by backporting patches. Hmmm...

Note, I have left ALSA at version 1.0.20, as it comes with the kernel. A couple of reasons why I have not compiled the 1.0.23 drivers -- has many ALSA patches so it is really beyond 1.0.20, and version 1.0.20 works well on my test PCs -- including one that "stutters" with ALSA 1.0.23.

Posted on 26 Oct 2010, 8:26


Posted on 26 Oct 2010, 9:28 by ozsouth
Wary/Quirky kernels?
Maybe the kernel is suitable for the next Quirky, assuming you go with for Wary.

Posted on 26 Oct 2010, 13:12 by DaveS
Is it possible to put dial-up drivers in a sep. sfs such that those that dont need them dont have to carry the extra size?

Posted on 26 Oct 2010, 15:16 by drongo
Dial up
Support for dial-up is one of the defining characteristics of Puppy surely? How would those with dial-up download the .sfs?

I haven't used dial-up for at least five years but someone has to support those guys. Up till now it's just been Puppy.

Posted on 26 Oct 2010, 16:23 by Iguleder
Kernel team
It won't be very hard to make our own kernel. We just need three things, a "kernel team", a group of people who have the skills for creating and applying kernel patches, some repository for patches and a coordinator (you!).

We'll have to scan all new kernel changelogs to trace fixes, then we need to find the commits and attempt to apply the fixes on our home-made LTS kernel.

Sounds fun :)

Posted on 26 Oct 2010, 18:16 by linuxcbon
We should not make our kernel. It's too difficult.

Posted on 27 Oct 2010, 9:30 by Raffy
Narrow focus - will this help?
Will a narrow focus in terms of target platforms help in making this possible? Say, focus on low-power platforms like the Intel Atom, VIA C7, and the upcoming AMD Fusion.