On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 21:32:27 -0200, peter green wrote: >> >> When I said no I meant that it hasnt a feature like Windows Update >> ("normal" linux distros have it) that will install "security" patches. >> Anyways I guess that since the 2.4 kernel is still being patched such >> updates are being applied to every new release of DSL. > Last I checked DSL was based on debian woody which has been out of > security support for some time is that still the case? from DSLs Official web site FAQ...(http://damnsmalllinux.org/wiki/index.php/FAQ#Will_DSL_ever_use_the_2.6_kernel.3F_Has_it_even_been_considered.3F) Will DSL ever use the 2.6 kernel? Has it even been considered? There are currently no plans to move to a 2.6.x kernel, for the following reasons. The 2.6.x kernel is significantly bigger than the 2.4.x kernel, so it would cramp DSL's functionality. The 2.6.x kernel drops a lot of support for legacy technologies, hardware, etc, and we want to keep DSL functional on as much hardware as possible All major improvements that have occurred to the 2.6.x tree have been, and are being backported to the 2.4.x tree, by a very active backporting team. And even though Linus said he would not participate in the backporting process this time, the demand for 2.4.x kernel maintenance is about the same as the demand for updates and improvements to the 2.6.x kernel, so even he has helped in the process, though not as much as what he does toward 2.6 development. For evidence of this activity, take a look at kernel.org, where you can see, the 2.4.30 kernel was released, just a few days after 2.6.10. If you want DSL with a 2.6 Kernel, try DSL-N, aka Damn Small Linux Not! It is very similar to Damn Small Linux, and made by the same people. It has 2.6 Kernel, GTK2, mplayer, core gnu utils (not busybox), and a few other common applications that didn't make the cut for size in DSL. -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist