MCreaves wrote: ↑Sun Jun 20, 2021 11:09 am
figueroa wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 11:20 pm
My 25 years says to stick with the mainstream LTS kernel that is compatible with your hardware. 4.19 gets regular backported security and feature fixes (but not enhancements) from upstream, and has 2 1/2 years left of supported life. Upgrading to newer with no compelling reason is often the path of much grief.
Generally, yes, this is good advice. However, sometimes you do need a newer kernel. A couple of my computers will not operate fully with the LTS kernel. The Liquorix kernel works on all of the computers I have tested it on so far. The advice should probably be:
"Try the current LTS kernel first. If everything works, stick to it. Otherwise, try a newer kernel."
I don't think it's that helpful to just reword what I wrote. Tell us something. What exactly is "A couple of my computers will not operate fully with the LTS kernel." What computers are they, and what part(s) didn't operate fully? Your examples may be helpful to others. Name the hardware.
All of my computers, newest about 10 years old, ran fine (all hardware supported) with bog standard 4.4 series distribution kernel. Some are still running 4.9 series kernels, some 4.19, my main desktop on 5.4. Liquorix kernel has its particular uses. Liquorix doesn't necessarily support hardware better. User's with special needs can also learn how to compile their own kernel in order to tune it to match their particular hardware. The reason for mainstream distribution kernels (especially LTS versions) is because they meet most people's needs with a generally good balance of power, throughput, heat generation, memory use and so on, and they don't change so often as to be a maintenance headache. Mainstream distribution kernels get a lot of eyes looking at them between upstream kernel.org and the many thousands or millions of end users. You pay your money (or not) and take your chances.
