×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

274 comments

Re:ReseirFS, finally! (1)

Shadowlion (18254) | more than 13 years ago | (#470774)

Actually, I like it for another reason.

No more having to listen to Hans Reiser take temper tantrums on the kernel mailing lists. I've never read more juvenile, whining, self-centered, arrogant, and childish posts in all my life. Rather than admit that maybe it wasn't appropriate for his code to be in the development kernel at a time when they were trying to freeze it, he whined, complained, and insulted everyone. Unable to acknowledge the technical reasons, he started accusing the core developers of favoritism, eliteness, and eventually just decided that there was one big conspiracy against him.

Although it saddens me that his code made it into the kernel, because of his behaviour, at least I won't have to read any more of his bitching.

It definitely gives me some insight as to why some people won't use GNU or GNU/Linux because RMS is the "spokesperson."


--

Re:2.4.1 is (not) DEVELOPMENT (1)

maroberts (15852) | more than 13 years ago | (#470781)

2.4.1 is a formal stable release, not development.
The middle number of the 3 is even for stable releases, odd for development releases. The last digit is used to indicate (small) incremental upgrades and patches.

New development features will go in the 2.5.x (or 3.1.x if we really want change) tree.

Re:Kernel Weirdness (2)

jnik (1733) | more than 13 years ago | (#470783)

The kernel docs explicitly state that if you're using PGCC, you're nuts. There's a reason those changes haven't been rolled into gcc yet. Incidentally, there's no such thing as egcs anymore. And finally, there's no sense in reporting bugs in the CVS tree without a corresponding fix or a very very well-narrowed problem definition--it's still in devel, and "it doesn't work for x" is not a big help in getting things fixed.

Re:VIA chipset (2)

WingNut (664) | more than 13 years ago | (#470784)

I've been digging for VIA IDE info too since I upgraded my mobo/cpu yesterday morning. I got a MSI K7T pro 2A (ata 100). Defaulting to DMA at boot up with 2.4.0 made my HD go BOOM. Check out signal ground for the most recent VIA IDE drivers:

http://www.signalground.com/article/3157986091

They worked like a charm for me.

Re:Distros... (1)

Explo (132216) | more than 13 years ago | (#470785)

Now I'm waiting for it to be put in distros. I guess I find it annoying how some distros (Mandrake, RedHat) go crazy if you change their kernel. However, they are better for getting a desktop to JUST WORK out of the box.

Heh. I'm currently running kernel 2.2.17 on this box that started it's life as RH 5.2. Sure, I've upgraded stuff via RPM and source tar.gz:s quite a lot during the last almost two years, but it works. ;) I haven't even used the distribution upgrade options available via the newer distributions.

Re:Distros... (2)

ThreeTee (28253) | more than 13 years ago | (#470786)

The only problem I had getting 2.4.0 to work with my RH 7 workstation was with USB...I had to tweak one line in the /etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit file, and that was because 2.4 was actually displaying my USB character devices in /proc/devices, whereas 2.2.14 did not.

The one thing that will save you many headaches when upgrading your Red Hat kernel is to modularize as much as possible. This is the way that Red Hat's system initialization scripts like it, and it's probably good practice anyway.

Re:Double Standard! (1)

4of12 (97621) | more than 13 years ago | (#470789)


You're absolutely right.

You have a very good point.

It is a double standard.

How do people justify two standards (apart from mind warp)?

Well, in this case, because one piece of software costs money, and people generally expect to get what they pay for. If it does not live up to their expectations of what the software should provide for that kind of money, then they will gripe, whine and complain.

Given the baseline of free software, software buyers want to see genuine value-added for the money they pay over the free solution. Their expectations have been raised so that they expect more than nothing for a price of zero (not even beginning to account for expectations raised by advertising of the product in question)

They want to see happen for computer software what has already happened for computer hardware -- cost/performance over the past couple of decades have plummeted by orders of magnitude.

Re:Isn't this a bit soon? (1)

NumberSyx (130129) | more than 13 years ago | (#470790)

Okay, there was a few bugs in 2.4, as there were bugs in every version of Windows and DOS before that, this is software after all, this happens. The difference between Windows and Linux is response time. It takes Microsoft months to fix even major security problems and minor problems can take years, if they are ever fixed at all. When they do fix problems, it tends to cause other problems, I point to WinNT SP 1-5 to prove my point. How many of those 65000+ bugs in Win2K have been fixed ? If you happen to be one of the many people who suffer from on of these bugs, don't bother call Microsoft, they will tell you this problem effects less than 2% of thier customers or that will be fixed in the next service pack and you have no way to fix the problem yourself.

It did take a long time to get from 2.2 to 2.4 as it took considerable time to get to 2.2, but I can rest easy that all the major bugs will be worked out quickly and even minor issues will be fixed soon enough and if I have to I can fix the problem myself or get someone who can. On top of all that, it costs me nothing but a little time and effort to upgrade to 2.4, were as it would cost me at least $49.95 to upgrade from Win98 to WinME as well as time and effort. There is absolutly no comparision here. Windows may win on the "Ease of use and installation" front, but looses horribly when we start to talk about stabilty, reliablity, timely bug fixes and total cost of ownership.


Jesus died for sombodies sins, but not mine.

Lousy timing Linus! (1)

Zocalo (252965) | more than 13 years ago | (#470793)

Just when everyone is weary from clicking the retry button in their FTP clients to grab the BIND bug fixes along comes a new kernel...

Just as well those FTP servers are all running a reliable OS I suppose... ;-)

What about the mirrors! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#470794)

Won't anyone think about the mirrors!

Distros... (1)

Octorian (14086) | more than 13 years ago | (#470798)

Now I'm waiting for it to be put in distros. I guess I find it annoying how some distros (Mandrake, RedHat) go crazy if you change their kernel. However, they are better for getting a desktop to JUST WORK out of the box.

Uh-oh! (2)

autocracy (192714) | more than 13 years ago | (#470869)

No, no, no! I'm on a winblows computer at school! I can't download it the instant it's out - I won't be part of the /. effect against kernel.org!

If you've read the ChangeLog, you'll notice that there's a change for almost everything. Regardless of what you use your computer for, and update will probably help you out. Remove all your 2.4-ac patches and tack on the 2.4.1 series patch, then get the next AC patch due out in five minutes (Alan Cox has a LOT of time on his hands based on how fast his patches were released when 2.4 came - as many as 2 a day!).

The problem with capped Karma is it only goes down...

drat! (1)

tiefling (155137) | more than 13 years ago | (#470876)

Oh darn it's not for Windows, oh well and I was hoping that new open sourced version had finally hit the shelves ;)

You sure its 2.4.1?? (4)

rich22 (156003) | more than 13 years ago | (#470878)

I was talking to an MSCE buddy of mine yesterday, and he swore up and down he is running Linux 7.1 now.

delicious (1)

i_know_it (303523) | more than 13 years ago | (#470884)

i love the kernal's chicken. uh, wait a sec... wrong kernal/colonel...
2.4.1 = 7
7 herbs and spices...
mmmmmmmmmmm.....

Re:Isn't this a bit soon? (3)

autocracy (192714) | more than 13 years ago | (#470899)

'Cause if you don't release it officially, you'd never get it tested. Bet you didn't know M$ has about a million different versions of Win95 (and 98 too - don't forget Service packs on top of THAT)!

The problem with capped Karma is it only goes down...

Dernit (1)

Ankou (261125) | more than 13 years ago | (#470906)

I JUST finished getting 2.4.0 to work perfectly last night, sigh, I knew this would happen ;^)

Re:Isn't this a bit soon? (2)

garethwi (118563) | more than 13 years ago | (#470908)

A commercial company like Microsoft wouldn't do this because they have the financial responsibility of selling their goods.

I take it you have never bothered actually using any of Microsofts products.

Mirror: (2)

Ashran (107876) | more than 13 years ago | (#470911)

www.ethernalquest.org/linux-2.4.1.tar.bz2 No gurantee that it will stay up tho =) (will be up in like 5-10 mins)

What's the big deal with all the new file systems? (1)

deathcubek (11766) | more than 13 years ago | (#470912)

What's the big deal with reiserfs, devfs, and the shared memory file systems?
Are they valid for kernel proper?
And what is the purpose for the shared memory stuff?
I've read a little about journaling file systems, they sound neat. And I don't think I fully understand the purpose of devfs, but why the new fstab entry for shm?

Well, look at the bright side... (2)

11thangel (103409) | more than 13 years ago | (#470913)

The mirrors won't be overflowing because half the linux community is at the Linux World Expo in NYC for the next few days. Too bad I'm stuck in !@#%$%$!#!@#$ school, otherwise I'd be using my ticket and be on my way there right now =(

Re:Distros... (2)

Ranger Rick (197) | more than 13 years ago | (#470923)

Huh? I've got Mandrake 7.2 and RH 6.2 systems that run just fine with the 2.4.0 kernel. I didn't have to upgrade anything on Mandrake, and RH only needed a new modutils (which I got by pulling the modutils-2.4.1 source RPM from mandrake's cooker and rebuilding).

It took almost no time to upgrade either, and they work fine.

1st Law Of Networking: Loose ends are bad, termination is good.

Re:Its about damned time. (2)

mikeplokta (223052) | more than 13 years ago | (#470937)

I'd far rather wait until it's ready than have incomplete and buggy releases rushed out to meet a predetermined schedule, which is what those "professional" software houses do far too frequently. Not having a rigid schedule is one of the benefits of open source, not a liability.

NVidia Drivers (1)

CarrotLord (161788) | more than 13 years ago | (#470940)

So, does anyone know if the NVidia kernel patches/modules needed for the GeForce2 chips work with 2.4.1?

rr

Re:Isn't this a bit soon? (1)

dSV3Hl (215182) | more than 13 years ago | (#470953)

Excuse me? Microsoft wouldn't do this?

  1. Windows 95, followed by Windows 95 B (OSR2?), Followed by 95 C...
  2. Win NT SP 1 through 6
  3. Windows 98 (it's self) followed by Win98 SE (Second Edition)

Besides the fact that a 2.3.x was available every few weeks... In case your memory is very short, there was a 2.0.1 release soon after 2.0.0, and a 2.2.1 release soon after 2.2.0.

Re:Its about damned time. (1)

topher1kenobe (2041) | more than 13 years ago | (#470956)

How long did it take for NT4 to move to win2000?
How long from Mac system 7 to 8? to 9? to X?
Linux moves along very nicely.

Mirrors (1)

Majix (139279) | more than 13 years ago | (#470961)

For once the mirrors seem to have had enough time to get the files. Kernel.org is already painfully slow, giving me a measly 20k/sec. If you're in Europe, try the Funet mirror [kernel.org]. I got a decent 320k/sec from there, entire download took about a minute (and I'm not talking about the patch file).

As far as I can see ... (1)

dudle (93939) | more than 13 years ago | (#470968)

The module loader is still broken. I don't know about you guys but I have to put all my modules in /lib/modules/2.4.x/misc - then run depmod -a in order for the stupid thing to see the modules.

Is it fixed in 2.4.1? I use 2.4.0-test12 and it doesn't work.

Thx

Re:Isn't this a bit soon? (3)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 13 years ago | (#470972)

Er, no. Windows is a very modular system (both "Old Windows", ie 3.1 - Me, and "Modern Windows", NT-2000, the latter family being based on something that was originally a microkernel) As a result, minor changes, such as device drivers, which are released all the time, have no effect on the kernel version number.

Linux is a monolythic kernel. This means that low level system components such as device drivers are part of the kernel (even if they're loaded seperately, such as with modules.) As a result of this, releasing updated device drivers or other updated components means releasing a "new" kernel, even though the central structure and code is unchanged.

New device drivers are released for Windows on a periodic basis, and other low level components are often changed without the user even knowing - popular applications from IE to Office regularly "update" the user's operating system to whatever was latest at the time that product was released.

The fact that the version number of Windows doesn't change doesn't mean it doesn't change just as regularly, if not more often.
--

Re:delicious (1)

andy@petdance.com (114827) | more than 13 years ago | (#470973)

i love the kernal's chicken. uh, wait a sec... wrong kernal/colonel... 2.4.1 = 7
7 herbs and spices...
mmmmmmmmmmm.....
Except that it's 11 herbs and spices.

Maybe in base 6...

--

Re:Its about damned time. (4)

Shoeboy (16224) | more than 13 years ago | (#470974)

Right right right,
and professional houses ship things late all the time too, NT 5 was supposed to ship in '97.
But I think some criticism of the slowness of kernel updates is self inflicted.
Don't you recall the heady days of 1998 when all the linux advocates were boasting about the speed of releases and proclaiming open source as a magic bullet that would lead to instant release and completely bug free code?
I think that the linux community is now suffering from a backlash brough on by having had too many advocates who were assholes, see Nick Petreley for a good example.
If you don't want to face heavy bitter criticism, don't make outrageous claims.
And for the love of God, read the linux-advocacy-howto.
--Shoeboy

Re:Its about damned time. (1)

Tharsis (7591) | more than 13 years ago | (#470976)

Indeed! I vote for a new release every day! (and a -testN version every hour or so:)

Re:Isn't this a bit soon? (1)

xjimhb (234034) | more than 13 years ago | (#470979)

A commercial company like Microsoft wouldn't do this because they have the financial responsibility of selling their goods.

A TRULY GREAT TROLL!

Nobody who knows what they're doing buys release 1 of ANYTHING from Micro$quish. All together, now, "Wait for the Service Pack!!!!"

good kernal install instructions (1)

blues36 (111706) | more than 13 years ago | (#470984)

Hey, where is a good place for a linux wanna be like myself to get good instruction on how to upgrade my kernal to 2.4?

Re:As far as I can see ... (1)

Ankou (261125) | more than 13 years ago | (#470985)

Try upgradeing modutils to modutils-2.4.0, fixed my probs, you also may need upgradeing pppd to pppd-2.4.0

Re:As far as I can see ... (1)

Majix (139279) | more than 13 years ago | (#470987)

Make sure your modutils is up to date. I'm using 2.3.21 and it's working just fine.

Re:good kernal install instructions (1)

Ankou (261125) | more than 13 years ago | (#470990)

http://www.thedukeofurl.org/reviews/misc/kernel222 4/5.shtml try that, should be easy to figure out....

Re:Isn't this a bit soon? (1)

phantumstranger (310589) | more than 13 years ago | (#470995)

"I think this is why people are suspicious of open source - it has no responsibility, and no liability, so it can afford to release what was, evidently, not the finished article...

...A commercial company like Microsoft wouldn't do this because they have the financial responsibility of selling their goods."

really now?

What is this "kernel"? (3)

Zigg (64962) | more than 13 years ago | (#470998)

What is this mysterious "kernel" package I keep hearing about? Have we finally come into the new world order where all operating systems run on one kernel that does not need a name? God bless America, I knew we'd standardize someday.

Note: this post is sarcastic, just in case you're wondering.

Re:NVidia Drivers (2)

Eric Gibson (166760) | more than 13 years ago | (#471001)

There is accelerated support for the GeForce2 in Xfree86-4.0.2. Also a new .9.6 version of the drivers came out pretty recently from NVidia and I was able to get them working. I wasn't with .9.5 due to incompatibilities with my AGP bus.

Don't hold me to this, but if you download the cvs of Xfree86 there is most likely a dri module for the GeForce2 by now (since they got the accelerated server, I bet they are workin on the dri module in due course).

2.4.2 (3)

AntiNorm (155641) | more than 13 years ago | (#471002)

2.4.2 - The answer to life, the universe, and everything
(Well, sort of)

---
Check in...OK! Check out...OK!

Troll Fugue in B# Major (1)

Rares Marian (83629) | more than 13 years ago | (#471004)

Wait now slow down, you gotta build it up to a climax.

The counterpoint in disagreement and in FUD, well that was just delicious.

However for those confused I must explain.

Linux is as modular as makes sense. If I need a new driver I untar the driver files and compile.

No reloading of the OS, no reboot no recompile of the kernel.

The reason drivers are in the kernel tree though separate, is because they're built by the Linux developers. That mneans the code is optimized on a level most compilers can't touch: the basic interface to the kernel.

Fully modularized code leads to bloat, conflicts between similar drivers from different companies, a lot of unnecessary bookkeeping exercises while drivers operate, LOSS of performance.

Thank you.

VIA chipset (1)

Majix (139279) | more than 13 years ago | (#471005)

I read linuxtoday.com that the DMA is now disabled by default with VIA chipsets because it's not working properly. I have an Abit KT7 (via kt133 chipset) and it seems to be working ok, except I get a LOT of "VFS: Disk change detected on device ide1(22,0)" and " dma_intr: status=0x51 { DriveReady SeekComplete Error }" messages.

The drive is still MUCH faster than with DMA disabled in the kernel. Anyone have any more details?

Re:Isn't this a bit soon? (1)

Leimy (6717) | more than 13 years ago | (#471006)

A commercial company like Microsoft wouldn't do this because they have the financial responsibility of selling their goods.

Microsoft doesn't need to worry about financial responsibility. They have a monopoly. People will buy their products because they have no choice. They get money on almost ever PC sold in the United States and I bet the same is true overseas through their OEM deals. So whether you know it or not you most likely paid microsoft money for software you don't necessarily use.

And they call people who download warez pirates...

Just goes to show you that theft can be made part of a legally binding agreement and that the extremely cunning and intelligent people like Bill Gates can exploit the law to make money.

Re:Isn't this a bit soon? (1)

phantumstranger (310589) | more than 13 years ago | (#471007)

"...the financial responsibility of selling their goods."

duh

I didn't know we were into that kind of redundancy.

In all honesty, I'm really thinking this post was intended to be a joke, but...

Re:Its about damned time. (5)

nels_tomlinson (106413) | more than 13 years ago | (#471009)

I'm sure that the post this answers was intended as irony, but for just in case some newcomer is reading this: when the 2.4.0 kernel was released, there had been people running it for many months, sometimes for many months without rebooting. One of the wonders of opensource is that you don't have to wait for the release, and so the release can happen when the product is ready, not when the business plan calls for it.

For the other side of this, consider Redhat 7.x. Their business plan called for a release when the compiler they wanted wasn't ready. In the closed-source paradigm, they would have called it ready and shipped bugs. Since the compiler is GPL'd they had to explicitly ship a beta compiler, and we got some fair warning about those bugs which we wouldn't have gotten from Microsoft or Sun. By the way, Redhat has done a wonderful job of making that work far better than it should, to judge by the reports of people who have been using it. In the usual closed-source, proprietary course of events, a closed source vendor such as Sun or MS would have denied the bugs, threatened customers to try to hush things up, and the folks who laid out big bucks for the bugs would have had to pay for an upgrade.

How is Linux ever to become a commercial success/serious platform if development takes years? Same way it's been getting there all along, I guess, by being so much better than the stuff that's rushed out the door to keep the marketing department happy.

Microsoft would do this precisely because of money (1)

Rares Marian (83629) | more than 13 years ago | (#471010)

A commercial company like Microsoft would do this because their market desires upgrades just as Linuxers do. They are frothing at the mouth to pay Microsoft.

Paying Microsoft has the following benefits:
1. You are in the presence of unearned fame when you use their software.
2. Unearned fame is the staple of many industries. It's a basic fact of Hollywood, Silicon Valley, AOLTimerica.
3. Unearned fame means progress.
4. Therefore by association you have progressed.
5. Even Karl Marx agrees with #4.

Thank you.

Your MCSE Buddy (1)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 13 years ago | (#471012)

Seems to be the one who modded you up +1 informative rather than +1 funny.

Re:Its about damned time. (1)

Penrif (33473) | more than 13 years ago | (#471013)

You're missing the point of the Linux kernel. The intent of the kernel developers and Linus himself is to make a good kernel. They then use that kernel. We should all be greatful that they allow us to use their kernel.
If companys depend on the use of the Linux kernel and want something changed about it, they should begin developing for it themselves. Companys are no different than hackers in this respect. As such, the "professionalised" development system you envision can come about by companies doing their own development

Re:Distros... (1)

Eric Gibson (166760) | more than 13 years ago | (#471014)

Actually Mandrake 7.2 was already set up for the new kernel. ie they used /etc/modules.conf instead of conf.modules and had the correct versions of the packages required. I was able to install 2.4.0-testx without any hassles at all... I believe you could even install the 2.4.0-testx kernels from an rpm on the extensions CD.

Re:NVidia Drivers (1)

raindown (234236) | more than 13 years ago | (#471015)

Yes, it works just fine:) i compiled a couple hours ago. As long as they are the 0.9-6 drivers.

Ooops.. MegaRAID is _still_ broken (2)

JamesGreenhalgh (181365) | more than 13 years ago | (#471016)

2.4.0-test9: works
2.4.0: broken.
2.4.1: still broken.

Just a little bit of a problem for people who sensibly are using a megaraid card for their root filesystem.

I just mailed Linus...

Re:What about the mirrors! (1)

Alex Pennace (27488) | more than 13 years ago | (#471018)

I think that most hackers who are saavy about the kernel know better than to download one from a mirror. Expecially after all the virus problems with RedHat, now is not the time to risk downloading a tainted version of the kernel [...]

That's a bad argument, kernel releases are PGP signed [kernel.org].

Re:Its about damned time. (1)

TheOutlawTorn (192318) | more than 13 years ago | (#471019)

Commercial companies make damn sure their products are out on time

???????????

Please enlighten us by providing us the names of these esteemed companies, I'm eager to purchase software from them.

Re:Elegant Troll (1)

f5426 (144654) | more than 13 years ago | (#471020)

Yep. I find this one very elegant. Full of shit inside, with a nice formal wrapping around.

I don't think he'll get the hordes, because refuting it is too difficult. Basically, most points he make are sort-of right, from which he draws flawed conclusions. A very nice one, indeed.

Re:Uh-oh! (1)

CyberKnet (184349) | more than 13 years ago | (#471021)

Mmmm. I envy your internet connection if you plan on slashdotting a 100Mbit internet connection with only www/ftp connections. (is slashdot even *capable* of slashdotting kernel.org???)

---

Re:Its about damned time. (2)

348 (124012) | more than 13 years ago | (#471022)

I don't know if it's all the advocates fault. It hink it may play more into the whole open source methodology from it days back as a grass roots effort. Spin, spin, spin, worse than politicians was the name of the game. Now that the methodology has stabilized somewhat Open Source fundamentals and methodology are being hit with the same issues and problems that BIGCO software development shop is hit with. Poor project management, over zealous targets, too much release functionality and too little testing. Too bad that most of the benefit of participating with open source projects is now lost and the "pirate ship" mentality is being lost. Most open source efforts that are widely seen via the press, like the 2.4.1 release is being tarnished by the same poor management practices that tarnish mainstream products like those from Microsoft to use your example.

Did I just lump the open source management community into the same bucket as Microsoft? Guess I did. Around /. I know that's quite a politically incorrect thing to do, but it is accurate. Software development problems are software development problems, regardless of the passion of the developers. Open Source management needs to wake up and smell the coffee or the open source projects like this will all get the reputation of untested, underdeveloped hackware.

Double Standard! (1)

iCharles (242580) | more than 13 years ago | (#471024)

You know, I thought 2.4 came out just last week. If MS were to release an OS upgrade, then, a week or two later, released a patch/hotfix/etc., there would be all sorts of discussion about how they never release the good stuff, how evil it is, etc.

When the open source community does it, they speak so highly about being able to react to bugs. It is a Good Thing.

I think that either you need to take the stance that producing patches rapidly and often is a good thing, or an indicator of the software being bad in the first place, be it Windows or Linux or other. YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!!!

Re:VIA chipset (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#471025)

It's not all VIA chipsets, just the vast majority of them (and it's VIA's fault - they (a) produced buggy chipsets and (b) made most of their different chipsets identify as the same when queried )

Kernel Weirdness (5)

jd (1658) | more than 13 years ago | (#471026)

I've not checked 2.4.1 yet, but many of the AC releases and -pre releases will NOT compile under PGCC or the EGCS CVS snapshots. Something -very- subtle has changed that will cause internal errors in these specific compilers.

("Stable" EGCS releases are fine. CVS snapshots older than 2-3 weeks ago seem to work, also, but no guarantee that the binaries'll actually do anything useful.)

I've reported the bug to the EGCS developers, as internal errors are definitely a compiler bug, EVEN IF it's also a kernel bug.

Having written all this, I'm now wondering if I'm the only Slashdotian insane enough to use bleeding-edge software compiled with other bleeding-edge software on production machines...

Re:Double Standard! (1)

ranessin (205172) | more than 13 years ago | (#471029)


But you can't apply a general rule like that to all situations... Sometimes releasing a patch shortly after the last release is a good thing, and sometimes it's an indicator of the earlier release being bad.

Frankly, 2.4.0 is quite stable for me. However, 2.4.1 adds some functionality that I want, therefore I consider this quick release, a good thing.

Ranessin

Re:Double Standard! (2)

maroberts (15852) | more than 13 years ago | (#471030)

It's a fair comment, with an element of truth in it.

However, 2.4.0 was the major Linux oddity. True open sourcers follow the creed 'Release Early, Release Often' (RERO). Linus probably deservedly got a lot of flak for the long time delay between 2.2 and 2.4. In the end I think 2.4.0 got released just in order to try and impose a 'feature freeze' and stop various developers trying to get their new whiz bang feature in before the shutters came down.

There is a conflict between RERO and another Open Source aphorism which is 'Its Ready when Its Ready', which means that we as a community don't like to give out release timetables of longer than a few weeks; in other words we try not to speak of vapourware.

I have no objection to rapid patches, which is not something MS is known for, although thankfully MS quality appears to be improving with the latest version of IE and Windows 2K.

Re:Uh-oh! (1)

Howie (4244) | more than 13 years ago | (#471031)

No, no, no! I'm on a winblows computer at school! I can't download it the instant it's out - I won't be part of the /. effect against kernel.org!

Right, because Windows doesn't have internet access built in [microsoft.com].

Re:Double Standard! (4)

banky (9941) | more than 13 years ago | (#471032)

You can have it both ways, because Windows and Free Software have different development models.

A GNU/Linux kernel upgrade is a different beast than a Service Pack. An SP often breaks existing software without warning, or changes functionality. A new kernel does all these things, and sometimes more, but its part of a (somewhat) known development path, and its largely an optional thing. I have machines running 2.0.36 happily, and 2.2.18 as well. Since all machines in question are uniprocessor and have fully functioning hardware drivers, I have no need go to 2.4. I'll wait until there's a need or maybe I just want to play around. The same cannot be said of SP's which often roll up critical security fixes and performance hacks.

Now, I'll agree to statements about the pace of kernel development being... off (patches every other day for a week after months between patches?) but for the most part, you're comparing apples and oranges.

It's a bit different though... (2)

Jerky McNaughty (1391) | more than 13 years ago | (#471033)

2.4.1 includes new features, like a journalling filesystem, not just fixes for existing stuff. Also, 2.4 (and 2.2) works a HELL of a lot better on my hardware (ASUS A7V + Athlon + GeForce 2 GTS) than Windows 2000 did (which would lockup hard within an hour, every time). I had to install new drivers for everything plus service pack 1 to even get it remotely stable. Of course, on the same hardware, I can run repeating concurrent kernel compiles with -j4 and not see a single crash for a week.

Plus, I didn't even have to pay for Linux.

Re:Isn't this a bit soon? (1)

KilobyteKnight (91023) | more than 13 years ago | (#471035)

- popular applications from IE to Office regularly "update" the user's operating system to whatever was latest at the time that product was released.

So, if you install Office 97 on Windows 2000 does that give you Windows 1997?

Any ext2 to reiserfs converters ? (1)

Hall (962) | more than 13 years ago | (#471037)

Subject says it all... then again, I've got enough free space and Partition Magic that I could divide up my existing ext2 partition and format it as reiser.

Re:Double Standard! (2)

ChristTrekker (91442) | more than 13 years ago | (#471038)

If I had any mod points left, I'd give you one. However, let me take a slightly different POV just for the sake of discussion.

The OS philosophy is different than the MS philosophy. The MS philosophy is that of a traditional (closed) software shop. Consumers expect that when the doors open and a new product is released, that it be "good" and usable in all ways. We don't want to have to keep updating, patching, and fixing it. Isn't that what they were doing behind those closed doors, after all? In the OS world, everything's open for peer review. We know exactly how the process is coming along, and can participate in it. We don't have to wait for "perfection" because we understand that everything is just another step in the process. In fact, waiting for the "finished product" would mean waiting forever, because there's always one more feature or one more performance tweak to get in.

What I'm aiming at here is that the MS's of the world release products, but the OS world releases features. It's simply the difference in the philosophy of development between the two.

People, please use the mirrors! (5)

phaze3000 (204500) | more than 13 years ago | (#471039)

get it from:

ftp://ftp.COUNTRYCODE.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/ v2.4/

Where country code is your country, eg uk for uk, us for the us, nl for holland etc etc.

I everyone keeps downloading from the main site then it creates problems for the mirrors, which believe me is a bad thing

--

yes, I am pleased, but... (2)

mirko (198274) | more than 13 years ago | (#471044)

  • ppp still doesn't work on my laptop using a >2.4 kernel (i *know* how to compile it, thanks.)
  • my network card is still unrecognized
  • my sound chip (Maestro2E) start whizzing when the laptop becomes hotter than usual...
  • I don't have some free space to reiserfs-ize my root
and...

my 2.2.18 rocks damn' well... :-)
Why should I change ?
To discover the evil of technological inflation ?
No, thanks, I am not missing the windows community ?
--

Mirrors people! (1)

rweir (96112) | more than 13 years ago | (#471045)

Do you really want to send everyone to kernel.org?

Really, it's not that hard to go to ftp..kernel.org instead is it?

Re:2.4.1 is DEVELOPMENT (1)

jnik (1733) | more than 13 years ago | (#471046)

2.4.1 is for the thrillseekers and developers, 2.4.2 will be the next update intended for end users.
Wrong. 2.4.x is the stable kernel series. The even/odd rule only applies to the first minor number, not to the minor minor. All 2.3.x are devel and all 2.4.x are stable.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...