Stay with RH9? / Compiling Kernel is Better?

On Sun, 2004-01-18 at 13:04, Craig Brooksby wrote:
> Two unrelated questions:
>
> 1) I use RH9, and like Frank and Austin, I see April coming. I know
> there are many more like us on this list.
>
> The prospect of backing my data up; formatting the harddrive and doing a
> fresh install of [fedora, debian, whatever], then reinstalling all the
> applications I use, and then all my data -- gives me the hives. I'm too
> much a newbie.
>
> Nothing is worse than getting stuck midstream. I can't afford it! If I
> undertake step A in that process, I must be confident of getting all the
> way to step N. I cannot tolerate bogging down -- this machine is
> mission-critical for me.
>
> I know there are a lot of people happily running RH7.3 etc. What if I
> decide just to ride out 2004 (or 2005) on RH9? Is that a dumb idea?
>
> 2) My machine (athlon 2200+) reports itself as an i686 architecture, yet
> I regularly install rpms etc. for i386. My kernel is for i386.
>
> If I compile my own kernel on this machine, do I then have an i686
> kernel? It that better / faster / more stable?
---
Might be faster but why?

You can simply upgrade to fedora if you choose...you will find things
actually run better and faster - with a few exceptions.

As discussed earlier, users .openoffice subdirectory in their home
folder should be deleted and you may have to change 'sources' for
up2date/yum. I found that other than that, the move from RH 9 to fedora
went great.

You can probably continue to run RH 9 for some time as it appears that
the community may be providing errata updates for quite some time. My
thinking is that the versions of evolution, mozilla and openoffice.org
are much improved in fedora so the upgrade is definitely worth it.

Craig