Beta
×

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!

Kernel 2.4.23 Released

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the hey-debian-how-about-compiling-in-acpi-this-time dept.

Linux 236

MikeCapone writes "As if we didn't already have enough articles about Linux kernel releases, Marcelo Tosatti has released the final 2.4.23 Linux kernel. Check out the changelog at Kerneltrap."

cancel ×

236 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Ummmm (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584710)

Two failures in a row....???

tsarkon: "Frost belongs unto you" (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584728)

'ol kpm does it again!

YOU DID IT! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584740)

Congratulations! You got First Post!

YOU DID IT!

I'm in the dark ages... (4, Funny)

eurleif (613257) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584711)

I'm still using 2.4.18!

Re:I'm in the dark ages... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584776)

I used 1.0.8 (from slackware 2.3) until well after 2.2 came out.

When I tried upgrading my main system from 2.2 to 2.4 it would crash on boot-up no matter how I tried to compile the kernel, so I'm still using one of the later 2.2's. My test system has a recent 2.4 from Slackware 9.0

MODS ON CRACK? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584782)

how is this funny?

You ever heard a Linux user trying to be funny??? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584819)

Belive me, this is better than most of their jokes....

ITS a PENGUIN: We are cool and hysterical.... No you're not. Ocelot, maybe, buy penguins are just passe...

Re:MODS ON CRACK? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584917)

because he isn't bleeding edge

Re:I'm in the dark ages... (2, Funny)

bsharitt (580506) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584788)

I'm having a hell of a time installing this under Mac OS X.

Re:I'm in the dark ages... (0, Flamebait)

ciaran_o_riordan (662132) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584938)

> I'm having a hell of a time installing this under Mac OS X

Then try installing it *over* MacOS, and add GNU and you'll finally have a real OS ;-p

Re:I'm in the dark ages... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584795)

2.4.18 .... no, you're a Debian user

Re:I'm in the dark ages... (1)

eurleif (613257) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584812)

How did you guess? I tried upgrading to 2.4.22 the other day, ended up having to use a rescue CD and switch back to 2.4.18.

Re:I'm in the dark ages... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584948)

Takes one to know one ;-)

Re:I'm in the dark ages... (1)

Biogenesis (670772) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584967)

you didn't leave the old kernel in your boot loaded did you?

Re:I'm in the dark ages... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584989)

Here's a hint:

Unpack the kernel source, cd into the directory with the unpacked source. Make menuconfig. Once that is done...

make-kpkg kernel_image

Wait a while...

Voila! One brand new kernel-image .deb ready to install with 'dpkg -i'

Hope this helps.

(make-kpkg can do much, much more than this, check man make-kpkg for details)

The ChangeLog is a long one (0, Redundant)

zero0w (572225) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584713)

The ChangeLog is a long one, I wonder if the patches will be ported to 2.6 as well....

fp! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584715)

fp!

poof! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584717)

first post.

Re:poof! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584849)

way to go, you shit-eating donkey dick.

you fucking fail it.

Kernel Release (0, Insightful)

MikeDawg (721537) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584718)

/. now announces releases of non-major kernels? Seems odd to me to announce the release of the 2.4.23 kernel, now maybe if it were the 2.6.0 kernel, that would be something to talk about. . .

Re:Kernel Release (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584755)

Shush.

Re:Kernel Release (2, Informative)

damiam (409504) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584767)

/. has always announced minor kernel releases. Where've you been?

Re:Kernel Release (2, Insightful)

kju (327) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584794)

So you have missed the stories about the release of the 2.4.22 [slashdot.org] , the 2.4.21 [slashdot.org] , the 2.4.18 [slashdot.org] , the 2.4.17 [slashdot.org] and many other linux kernels. So maybe next time you should first get your facts straight, before posting some uninformed nonsense.

Re:Kernel Release (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584875)

Hopefully i will catch this moderator abuse on metamoderation. Nothing trollish about this insightful comment, really!

Re:Kernel Release (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584897)

Moderator activism you might say. (sorry I was up all night watching a debate on c-span about judicial activism...yes im a geek!)

c-span !=geeky (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7585037)

c-span==masochistic++

Re:Kernel Release (-1, Flamebait)

Epistax (544591) | more than 10 years ago | (#7585041)

Ooooh look at me, I have facts, wooooo

His intention was to point out that this should not be done, that is, make a (front page) headline about every minor release. Instead of going against this intention, you attacked the manner in which he expressed it. Indeed, he was incorrect in what he said, yet your comment still made me dumber.

Re:Kernel Release (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584811)

so we would have a kernel release news topic once in what? two years?

Slashdot announces (-1, Flamebait)

t0ny (590331) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584964)

They announce all point releases of Linux and OSX. They also make sure they make sure to complain about every windows service pack, because they feel MS is being 'excessive', and "should have gotten it programmed correctly the first time".

The latter statement doesnt apply to them reporting on anything but MS products, nowever.

Re:Kernel Release (0)

unixformat (717213) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584973)

Hey, it could be worse, /. could announce every new test release of the 2.6 kernel and we have had 11 of these so far for 2.6. We could also have announcements of every pre kernel release.

Re:Kernel Release (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7585027)

You know what? I was really pleased to see the story. Then I saw your message and felt downhearted again.

Look, give it a rest. If you don't like the choice of a story - DON'T READ IT. If you don't like any of the sotries on Slashdot, DON'T READ IT.

It's like going to a trumpet player's website and complaining about all these annoying trumpet stories.

Or are you seriously suggesting that Slashdot would be improved by posting fewer stories? From all the complaints, it sound's like they're rejecting enough as it is. Come on, it's not like this announcement won't help anyone.

Is there.. (0, Troll)

tarquin_fim_bim (649994) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584721)

..really any point upgrading? 2.6 should be out in a couple of weeks.

Re:Is there.. (3, Insightful)

damiam (409504) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584787)

Not everyone plans on upgrading to 2.6.0 the moment it comes out.

Re:Is there.. (4, Insightful)

OneFix (18661) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584790)

Because some ppl are still running 2.4 in production environments...the headline is actually kinda wrong...the kernel will actually have new releases...they will just be maintanence releases...only, no new drivers, etc...just bug fixes...

For instance, there was a new release of the 2.2 kernel as early as March of this year.

Re:Is there.. (1)

tarquin_fim_bim (649994) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584837)

I don't wish to appear facetious but who in their right mind would run a 2.5 kernel in a production environment, my point was that 2.6 has many performance improvements over 2.4 so I should not imagine even mission critical production environments sticking with 2.4 after 2.6 is released.

Re:Is there.. (5, Insightful)

damiam (409504) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584869)

I should not imagine even mission critical production environments sticking with 2.4 after 2.6 is released.

That's why you're not in charge of a mission critical production environment. Those who are know that an increase in performance is not worth a decrease in reliability. 2.6.0 is not going to be as stable and reliable as 2.4.23 is, just as 2.4.0 wasn't as stable as 2.2.18.

Re:Is there.. (0, Troll)

tarquin_fim_bim (649994) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584939)

Your assumptions here seem to be more like guesses, you obviously don't follow the kernel development particularly closely, nor test pre releases, 2.6.0-test10 fuctioned perfectly well for me in my test environment, but I haven't tried 2.6.0-test11 yet so you could have a point, but I don't think so. I don't think you're on top of your game.

Re:Is there.. (1)

BaldingByMicrosoft (585534) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584955)

Actually, they're dead-on. Just like new versions of Windoze don't make it onto my production boxes until SP1 at the earliest.

Re:Is there.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7585001)

Nice troll. 2.6 is unstable and won't be for quite some time. I'd give it at least a year.

Re:Is there.. (0, Redundant)

bconway (63464) | more than 10 years ago | (#7585042)

You must be new to Linux. Having gone through the unstable -> stable shift 3 times now, I can tell you from experience it will be quite a while before the new 2.6 kernel series is up to par with 2.4 for stability and performance. Just because your test systems don't crash doesn't mean everyone should haphazardly upgrade. Look at the 2.6 TODO list, it's still very extensive.

Re:Is there.. (4, Informative)

iabervon (1971) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584813)

2.6 isn't 100% userspace-compatible with 2.4; there are a number of utilities which need to be upgraded to deal with 2.6, and a few cases where 2.4 stuff isn't supported at all. So I wouldn't expect all 2.4 installations to be able to go to 2.6 when the time comes. For that matter, 2.4 still has the better ACPI support, and probably still will when 2.6.0 comes out.

As for when 2.6.0 will be out, Linus is turning that over to Andrew Morton, and we really have no idea what his style of stable kernel releases will be like. I'd actually expect to next see a relatively long 2.6.0-rc series before 2.6.0; maybe even a 2.6.0-pre series before that, depending on what he thinks of the seriousness of the remaining "should-fix" and "must-fix" lists and the reported bugs.

Re:Is there.. (2, Informative)

Nucleon500 (628631) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584941)

Regarding 2.6.0, it's a little late to speculate on the pre-releases. 2.6.0-test11 is out now, and it will be the last test release. In two or three weeks, after the bug reports subside to a dull roar, 2.6.0 will be out. It will, however, be interesting to see how Andrew Morton takes care of 2.6.x (x > 0) releases.

Re:Is there.. (1)

bconway (63464) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584834)

Some people want a stable environment. 2.4.23 provides that.

Re:Is there.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584919)

So does 2.4.22

Re:Is there.. (4, Insightful)

Alan (347) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584844)

Some of the changes in 2.6 are keeping me from upgrading right now.
- change in mouse behaviour (speed, access to extra buttons)
- some 3rd party modules not updated (nforce2 nic drivers, vmware)
- I've heard cd burning has issues
- I can updated the 2.4.x kernels without any huge worries that my remote server will blow up and require me to get some co-lo monkey to try to fix it :)

Re:Is there.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7585019)

Are all of your co-lo boxes standalone? If you have any situations where there are multiple systems, then you should consider cross-connecting them with serial cables. Tell LILO (or grub, I guess) to use the serial port, enable the "console on serial port" in the kernel, and run a getty on there.

If you also enable automatic reboots on panic, then you'll have to actually hang the box to require monkey intervention. If you have a hardware watchdog, then even that isn't a problem since it'll unstick itself.

Finally, you could get something like a PC Weasel or a box that has a built-in management controller, but those cost money. The serial stuff is cheap and effective for many of the common remote-BOFH failure modes, like blowing away the firewall rules when the default policy is set to DROP!

Re:Is there.. (3, Informative)

descentr (296258) | more than 10 years ago | (#7585063)

VMWare works fine in 2.6, given that you install the updates at http://knihovny.cvut.cz/ftp/pub/vmware/. Just get vmware-any-any-update45.tar.gz and run the install script. Then re-run vmware-config.pl. Make sure that your 2.6 kernel doesn't have preempting enabled (this crashes for me) and you're all set. I've been running VMWare on 2.6.0-test10 and test11 with no problems at all.

Re:Is there.. (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584899)

depends on how you look it, if you want a stable environment and thist fixes/adds/changes something you want then it might be worth upgrading.

but then again if you're machines are running sweet and there's no security holes in the earlier kernel then there's not much reason to upgrade unless you want to upgrade just for fun.

same goes for going to 2.6, though i don't think many people would regard the 2.6.0 release as proven stable enough for a production system on the release day either.

if it works(your current kernel) and upgrading doesn't fix anything relevant to you, why bother?

Re:Is there.. (5, Insightful)

Angst Badger (8636) | more than 10 years ago | (#7585010)

..really any point upgrading? 2.6 should be out in a couple of weeks.

Did you miss the early 2.4.x kernels? The 2.4 kernel was nicknamed "the kernel of pain" for a reason. The VM madness was so horrid where I work -- it could be relied upon to clobber MySQL every time the load got moderately high -- that we immediately rolled back to whatever the latest 2.2.x kernel was at the time.

The fact that Linux is the product of an open development process certainly improves code quality, but it doesn't mean that all of the major bugs have been worked out before it's been subjected to the full power of real world production use.

DUH. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7585035)

How short our memories are.

Remember the early 2.4 series? Remember the problems? The major rewrites of the VM?

Ah but this is slashdot. Thinking things through isn't really practiced much here.

Re:Is there.. (2, Informative)

xenocide2 (231786) | more than 10 years ago | (#7585040)

Some people don't really feel safe enough with latest stable kernels. Sometimes this means running a few weeks behind the latest kernel.org stable release, sometimes this means running a point release behind (unless something serious is uncovered). Sometimes it means basing your entire distrobution on a kernel from the previous stable branch (the Debian installer defaults to 2.2 still... though that will change soon)!

Myself I don't think I'll be upgrading immediately to 2.6. I know the developers feel confident in the 2.6 tree, but quality release needs stress testing, in the kind of volume you might find in a point-oh release. Save any show stoppers, I'll probably join in the 2.6 fun in 2.6.1 or so. I know that its not a safety guarentee; 2.4.18 or so had a vulnerability in pthread I hear.

You bastards... (-1, Redundant)

dark-br (473115) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584725)

you have /.ed marcelo, thewonderpenguin!!!

Decimal literals in the code? (-1, Troll)

Thinkit3 (671998) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584731)

I read around 1/5th of the literals are decimal. Decimal has no place in computer code (unless you're coding bowling scores). It should be nearly all hexadecimal. Have there ever been strictly cosmetic changes to the source (like renaming variables)? This would be a good one.

Re:Decimal literals in the code? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584828)

You're a fucking ignorant twat. Next question.

Cavet Emptor! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584732)

I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but before trying this out, you should read this first [penguinhosting.com] .

If you don't, and end up with show-stopping problems, don't blame me!

Re:Cavet Emptor! (-1, Troll)

rduke15 (721841) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584768)

Fascinating! A lot to learn there.

Did you know 1009 was a prime number? I now have that privilege.

The parent should be modded ... Insightful, I guess.

GOATSE LINK (-1, Offtopic)

gotem (678274) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584772)

damn, now we have to check penguinshosting urls too

deep breath... (-1, Troll)

wrinkledshirt (228541) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584734)

In Soviet Russia, all your kernel update notices are belong to slashdot posters who complain about whether or not kernel update notices are front page worthy! Oh yeah, and HOT GRITS!

Now, before you mod me down, ask yourself if anything more insightful than the above is going to get posted on this thread.

Okay, now mod me down.

Any reason to update? (1)

hhg (200613) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584738)

With this long changelog, I don't know what's important and what is not. Is there any reason to update from 2.4.22?

Re:Any reason to update? (1)

RdsArts (667685) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584792)

Of course there is. It's a whole version number higher.

What sort of geek are you, man? ;)

REGIME CHANGE STARTS AT HOME! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584745)

PLANT BUSH BACK IN TEXAS!

So what??? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584748)

Still doesn't run RealPlayer.

Re:So what??? (1, Offtopic)

OneFix (18661) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584761)

No, it's better...it runs MPlayer...which plays realmedia without all of the Real Networks ads!!!

Thud Thud Thud! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584766)

Irony??? I've got maids to do that.

Re:So what??? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584763)

Yes it does!

Re:So what??? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584798)

The fact that 2 stupid people have replied to this doesn't make it Flamebait. The comment is ironic. I.e. you have to know how shit RealPlayer is to realise how an OS that does not run it might be an advantage.... Sheesh.

Actuallt that is rather inflamitory, isn't it???

Re:So what??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584884)

and that realplayer had linux versions on year zero or something..

when it was still 'the thing' for internet radio over dialup.

this is a PAGE WIDENING (aka Page Goatseing) post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584751)

motdmotdmotdmotdmotdmotdmotd MESSAGE OF THE DAY motdmotdtmodtmotdmotdmotd

W%WWwwWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW**88WWWWWWWWWWW WWWWabcWWWWWWWW
W%WWwwWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW**88WWWWWWWWWWW WWWWabcWWWWWWWW W%WWwwWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW**88WWWWWWWWWWW WWWWabcWWWWWWWW

motdmotdmotdmotdmotdmotdmotd MESSAGE OF THE DAY motdmotdtmodtmotdmotdmotd

Mod Parent UP! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584808)

Nice work, fella!!!!!!

Re:this is a PAGE WIDENING (aka Page Goatseing) po (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584870)

is this a fellow jihadi?

allah akbar!

Re:this is a PAGE WIDENING (aka Page Goatseing) po (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584935)

yes!

Praised be Allah!

Down with infidels!

Help the RIAA! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584752)

#1 Email 'em
1. Look up the email address of your regional RIAA authority (listed in your white pages under "Recording Industry: Regional Authorities)
2. Open up your email program, such as Microsoft Outlook(TM) or Microsoft Outlook Express(TM)
3. Create an email to the email address you found.
4. Attach all the MP3s you're returning. (If you don't know how to attach a file, look in the help file for your email program).
5. Press send.

#2 Burn 'em
1. Burn a copy of your stolen MP3's. (Here's a guide: You can fit about 200 MP3s on a CD.)
2. Package the CD's in a plastic case
3. Place the CD case in an envelope. Carefully cut a piece of cardboard the size of the CD case.
4. Seal the envelope. (Hint: You might consider putting in a note saying you're sorry.)
5. Put on the right number of stamps.
6. Address it to:
The RIAA
c/o America

#3 Snail Mail 'em
1. Locate on your computer the first MP3 you want to send. (Hint: MP3s usually end with the letters ".MP3" or ".mp3"
2. Open up your hex editor. (Did you know that "hex" is short for "hexadecimal?" Well now you do! :)
3. Resize the hex dump (usually on the left side of the page) as small as it goes. You won't be needing it.
4. Drag-select the ASCII dump. Use the "copy" command.
5. Open your favorite word processor such as Microsoft Word(TM) or Microsoft WordPad(TM). Press "paste."
6. Set the page margins to 1" all around (2.54 centimeters). Consider single-spacing.
7. Load your printer with a fresh ream of paper. (Did you know that there are 500 pages in a ream?)
8. Press print.
9. Pack the paper carefully in a carton and take to the post office.
10. Send to the RIAA address in Method #2.

#4 Fax 'em
1. Follow the instructions for snail mailing, but do not go to the post office.
2. Look up the fax number of the nearest RIAA Regional Authority.
3. Load your fax machine with the paper. (Hint: Most fax machines can only load 10-20 pages at a time. Can you figure out how many batches your MP3s will take...without using a calculator! :)
4. Press send.

Now don't you feel better? :)

[Stolen from here [sendthemback.org] [analse.cx]]

MIrrors not updated yet! (4, Funny)

Alan (347) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584753)

ftp.us.kernel.org and ftp.ca.kernel.org aren't updated yet, so I guess we're free to slashdot the main kernel.org server back to the stone age? :)

Re:MIrrors not updated yet! (1)

brejc8 (223089) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584840)

You could mirror [wolffelaar.nl] it when you do.

Re:MIrrors not updated yet! (0, Redundant)

Alan (347) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584881)

I already sucked it down from the main kernel.org site actually, 2.5mb/s :)

Newbie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584758)

I'm a newbie to linux kernel updating. Would anyone like to educate me on the process, or point me to a place I can learn.

-Kevin

Re:Newbie (0)

superfast-scooter (693095) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584784)

http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Kernel-HOWTO/index.html

Re:Newbie (1)

WoodstockJeff (568111) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584922)

Your link returns:

"The Kernel-HOWTO has been removed for review."

Re:Newbie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584789)

www.ldp.org
www.linuxdoc.org

have fun.

Mmmm... Kernel (0, Funny)

MicktheMech (697533) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584771)

I know I'm going to be modded down for this, but everytime somebody mentions the kernel I can't help but picture Tux with a big bucket of Pop-Corn. I know it's wrong, but I just can't help it.

Re:Mmmm... Kernel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584833)

funny because when i read "kernel" i imagine Colonel Sanders slam-dunking a chicken nugget into the mouth of a black man.

The Pentaverate (0, Troll)

Bun (34387) | more than 10 years ago | (#7585032)

Oh how I hate the colonel, with his wee beady eyes and the smug look on his face... Oh, you're gonna buy my chicken, oooooohhhhhhhh!

Is this ... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584774)

Is this the "copy everything OSnews.com posts" day?

Woohoo!! (4, Informative)

Howard Beale (92386) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584801)

Hopefully, this fixes some nasty kernel oopses that occur when using the pl2303 usb-serial driver. I've had a lot of trouble with this when using my Deluo GPS.

how is work done simultaneously (1, Redundant)

superfast-scooter (693095) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584809)

on the 2.4 and 2.6 releases? with 2.6 so close to release ... is there much point to having a 2.4+x release out? are the changes made to the new 2.4 already in the 2.6, or is it still newer stuff which hasnt been put into 2.6?

Re:how is work done simultaneously (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584843)

Some people like doing fast development and implementing new features. Others like fine-tuning, perfecting what has gone before.

As there needs to be both progress, and stable platforms to work with, this multiple-tier system seems just about right to me.

Re:how is work done simultaneously (1)

superfast-scooter (693095) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584882)

right, but are these changes propagated upwards towards the newer releases(2.4 ---> 2.6), or are they done back (2.4 --- 2.6)?
like, would the changelog for this release look like the changelog for the latest 2.6 release, or the other way round?

Re:how is work done simultaneously (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584896)

Features are often backported from the development kernels, especially by distributors for use in their own packaged kernels.

Re:how is work done simultaneously (1)

Webmonger (24302) | more than 10 years ago | (#7585017)

Both. In the early days of 2.5, it seemed more common to port from 2.4 to 2.5, but lately the trend has been in the opposite direction. Just my perceptions, though.

No cryptoloop? (3, Interesting)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584829)

Still no cryptoloop. CryptoAPI is in there. but the darn cryptoloop driver, which makes cryptoAPI actually useful isn't in there yet.

What a waste, all my USB keys and compact flash are encrypted. I guess I'll just see if OpenBSD supports my videocard yet. *sigh*

Re:No cryptoloop? (4, Informative)

Tyler Eaves (344284) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584892)

Is your graphics card a 9x00 Radeon by any chance? If so, you're in luck, sorta. You'll need to pull XFree from CVS and build it by hand (no big deal), and then use the "radeon" driver. That supports all currently released radeon cards. I'm running a 9600 in FreeBSD with zero problems.

Re:No cryptoloop? (2, Informative)

damiam (409504) | more than 10 years ago | (#7584900)

You could just apply the patch yourself.

Do We Really Need This??!! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584862)

hey-debian-how-about-compiling-in-acpi-this-time

I don't want to sound like a troll, but does anybody else this comment is wholly inappropriate to be included in the text??

If I had written that as a post, I'd get tossed into -1, Flamebait before you know it. Yet the editors are seemingly bigger flamebaiters and trolls than the readers.

Seriously, if michael has such a problem with Debian, write a comment, and face the moderation and the replies. If he can't do that, then don't bother creating shit like that.

Re:Do We Really Need This??!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584945)

Michael Sims already modded down your excellent point. Sorry.

Re:Do We Really Need This??!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584947)

Typical; an honest, direct, ontopic criticism of michael's dispicable behavior gets modded -1.

I love how slashdot preaches freedom of speech, hates censorship, yet has no problem supressing opinions which are incovenient to them.

Nice work, hypocrites.

Re:Do We Really Need This??!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584957)

You may be interested in the work of Anti Slash [anti-slash.org]

You are not the only one who sees the constant and blatant hypocrisy practiced by Slashdot.

Re:Do We Really Need This??!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584962)

actually, i am one of the first followers of the Slashdot Jihad.

You can consider me the Kaddahfi of Slashdot.

Re:Do We Really Need This??!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7585024)

Michael is a typical leftist like you'll find on college campuses where free speech is only tolerated if it's politically-correct speech and you've been indoctrinated into group-think mentality.

You know Michael jacks off while mod-bombing the non-group-think posts or anything that is criticial of him. I wonder if this guy gets the shit kicked out of him on a weekly basis.

Dumb noob Linux question (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7584949)

Was there ever a 2.5 Kernel? Did they ever do anything in that area or was that tossed into an enternal void? Just curious...

Re:Dumb noob Linux question (3, Informative)

netsharc (195805) | more than 10 years ago | (#7585031)

Yeah, kinda strange.. they were saying 2.5 is supposed to be the development, but now it seems the devel versions as the ones with -preX affixed to it.

Anyway, the way the Linux kernel works, it's x.y.z. For the stable version, x is currently 2, y is 4 and z is 23 (I guess). If y is an odd number, it's "development", and may be unstable, might not compile and should interest only programmers. If y is an even number, it's production and should work. So 2.5 was there, but the general public probably wasn't really interested in it. Of course, now they have -preX's at the end, so that's another paragraph to the rules, one which I'm not really familiar with. :)
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?