After I manually compiled the pristine 2.6.20 from kernel.org, I just realized that the debian package is also available, unofficially (still from a debian repository):
It hasn't run all the debian checks, but I'm pretty confident
You have to add this to your sources.list:

These kernels are available:

Have fun

I've never had a problem compiling directly from kernel.org. I usually grab the new kernel (full versions only, like after 2.6.19 I didn't mess with 2.6.19.1 and 2.6.19.2, but grabbed 2.6.20 and compiled while I watched the superbowl) and use the make-kpkg tools as detailed in the sticky thread to compile. I've never had a problem.

It is cool that if you don't want to "roll your own", the Debian guys get a new kernel into the repos quickly.

Have you ever had a problem with the non-Deb kernel? I can't say I've ever looked at the patches to see what Debian does to the vanilla kernel to make it "Debian approved".

Peace,
JimBass

Mine was based on a make oldconfig from way back on a debian kernel but besides that I do the same. There is a lot that I don't need in my kernel and also I add my one "guilty pleasure" patch : bootsplash.

I sometimes grab the point releases if they look interesting or urgent.

Never had any problem with a few unpatched kernels.
What's really interesting for desktop machines is the support for more hardware, like DVB or motherboards,..

apt-get source linux-image-2.6xxx
Then look at the diff.gz file if you want to know the patch - easy
There's a webpage available also, where is the question

You can keep your .config that's important. make oldconfig or make directly(default option if you don't make make config, it looks for an old one in /boot). Takes about 15mn otherwise to redo it no?

Never say never

Don't use dm_crypt on 2.6.20.

I will get in touch with the kernel team if the bug is not already known