asterisk users - Aug 2005 - RE: Is the 2.6 Linux kernel ready for produc tion * environment

uname -a

Linux asterisk 2.6.10-1.1771_FC2smp # 1 SMP Mon Mar 20 01:10:51 EST i686
i686 i386 GNU/Linux

Processing hundreds of calls & faxes a day. No problem. If you are going to
use a Fedora box make sure you yum update right after install then the
kernel sources symbolic link is not horribly broken as it used to be.
Otherwise, just go. 

-----Original Message-----
From: canuck15
To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Sent: 8/31/2005 11:42 AM
Subject: [Asterisk-Users] RE: Is the 2.6 Linux kernel ready for production *
environment

I was wondering what peoples thoughts are about this.  It seem that *
works just as well on Linux 2.6 as 2.4.  Maybe a few small issues here
and there but generally it seems to me that * is just as stable on
either platform.  2.4 is the obvious choice for the highest possiblility
of a stable well tested environment but 2.6 seems to have some enticing
benefits.  
 
Can Linux 2.6 be considered a viable choice now a days for someone
looking for a well tested stable production environment even though it
is not as well tested as 2.4 (yet!).  
 <<ATT00663.txt>>

You should probably qualify the type of pstn interface that your using
as I'm sure its _not_ the digium TDM card (eg, fax failures).

------------------------
> uname -a
> 
> Linux asterisk 2.6.10-1.1771_FC2smp # 1 SMP Mon Mar 20 01:10:51 EST i686
> i686 i386 GNU/Linux
> 
> Processing hundreds of calls & faxes a day. No problem. If you are
going to
> use a Fedora box make sure you yum update right after install then the
> kernel sources symbolic link is not horribly broken as it used to be.
> Otherwise, just go. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: canuck15
> To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
> Sent: 8/31/2005 11:42 AM
> Subject: [Asterisk-Users] RE: Is the 2.6 Linux kernel ready for production
*
> environment
> 
> I was wondering what peoples thoughts are about this.  It seem that *
> works just as well on Linux 2.6 as 2.4.  Maybe a few small issues here
> and there but generally it seems to me that * is just as stable on
> either platform.  2.4 is the obvious choice for the highest possiblility
> of a stable well tested environment but 2.6 seems to have some enticing
> benefits.  
>  
> Can Linux 2.6 be considered a viable choice now a days for someone
> looking for a well tested stable production environment even though it
> is not as well tested as 2.4 (yet!).