Slashdot Mirror
Linux 2.2.17 Released
Paul Weaver was among the hoardes to note that Linux 2.2.17 has been officialy released at the usual places. So take some time out from trying to compile 2.4 test releases and update the boxes that need stable kernels.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Alan Cox couldn't wait for the sluggish Linus, and he released the 2.2.18-pre series (pre-1 and pre-2) against the 2.2.17-pre20.
Now that 2.2.17 is official, where does 2.2.18-pre series stand ?
I think the question I want to ask is this:
Is the official 2.2.17 exactly the same as
2.2.17-pre20 ?
May you be well and happy.
if it's not in there now, http://www.linux-ide.org
Joe,
My sarcasm was definitely getting in the way. I had considered using the 4sp6 to 4.6 analogy, but I got a little too carried away with my rant. I've got to come down my almost knee jerk reaction to statements such as...
No, It's not linus's fault that Microsoft makes shitty products and only releases them every few years
I see these kinds of blanket statements about any product I just smell troll spirit in the air. What's of major concern is how statements like this are for more favorable for MS in the long run.
Anyhow, thanks for the clarification to my post.
The line must be drawn here. This far. No further.
Well I've got a "classic" Athlon 750 and a 56k modem... only the phone lines 'round here are so shitty that 28.8 is akin to winning the lottery for me.
I'd have to agree... at this point I don't have any systems that I can consider as "spare" boxes. I installed FreeBSD (and winders, on another drive) on my "power geek" system, an Athlon 750, and that leaves my Linux laptop for production use. (Things such as email, web browsing, IRC, etc) On the laptop I've got Mandrake 7.0 (with many upgrades) with a 2.2.14 kernel and everything works beautifully.
And I KNOW from EXPERIENCE that whenever I go upgrading something that ain't broke, it gets broke in a hurry.
Thinking of putting together a homebrew Linux system alongside windows on the second drive, though, just to see if I can do it.
2.4.0test8pre4 just ate my linux-kernel mailbox. *sniffle*
Just bought some of Intel's i815 motherboards with on-board ethernet. Unfortunately, 2.2.16 does not have a driver for the Intel® 82562ET 10/100 Mbit/sec Platform LAN that comes built into the motherboards (optional of course). From what I read on newsgroups support could be added with a patch or two to the 2.2.16 kernel since the chip is based on popular ethernet cards using tulip drivers, but unfortunately I don't possess enough Linux Karma to get that to work yet. Anyway, now that 2.2.17 is out hopefully RedHat will be releasing some new RPMs soon and I can get my ethernet to work, and if they don't.. well I'll just have to get down n' dirty and make RedHat and my 2.2.17 kernel play nice ;)
JOhn
Campaign for Liberty
depends how drunk I am :)
~ppppppppö
Well, I'll go ahead and say why it was important for me, at least this time around... I wanted to start a homebrew Linux setup, but I was waiting for 2.2.17 to be released. And now it is. And thanks to
So there, naysayers. This human was satisfied. I'm not into all that anime stuff as much as everyone else here.
Warning: The DELL/AMI Megaraid driver in 2.2.16 and .17 is unstable and may crash with console message "Mailbox locked" on heavy load. See thread on the linux-kernel mailing list.
http://slashdot.org/articles/98/1 1/15/1120246.shtml gives a randomly chosen article from Nov 98
Follow the links. See for yourself.
a service pack isn't really the equivalent of a kernel update.
Come again? A series of fixes, upgrades, and patches to the underlying kernel of Linux is in someway different than the exact same thing for the kernel on NT?
In it's essence, a kernel upgrade is basically a new version of linux coming out.
Now the kernel IS the operating system? Umm, I don't tink so quiksdraw.
Being that you hear about it on slashdot whenever a new version of windows comes out - then this kernel release *does* qualify as news
Are you at all familiar with what a service pack for NT or Win2k is, what it includes, what it upgrades? Your post would already indicate an answer.
No, It's not linus's fault that Microsoft makes shitty products and only releases them every few years.
Ahh, so it's MS that's the bunch of dummies. Now I get it, thanks.
The line must be drawn here. This far. No further.
I've been running 2.4.0-testx for quite a while, without any problems. It's easier than trying to patch 2.2.16 to cover everything!
...Corruption in the goat herd Flesh crumbles in the real world.
I think it's actually a pretty interesting idea, so it doesn't deserve to be marked as offtopic.
--
The shareholder is always right.
Linus is a nice guy. He really is.
But there's a touch of ego going on here; if he were to put the kernel in CVS, like the FreeBSD guys do, then he would lose a certain amount of control over who gets what and when.
Linus is quoted as saying "Think of me as CVS with brains", which tells you everything you need to know about his attitude to source control.
--
Peter
Just go with W2K - it is much better than any linux out there. Put your computer to good use.
That's an awfully serious accusation to be levelling against the likes of Alan. Please list reliable sources, 'cuz this is the story of the year if you can prove it.
Given that Redhat funded development of the TUX webserver, which requires 2.4 for it's fundamental operation, I'm not gonna put much stock in it though...
I've been using my custom compiled 2.2.15 kernel for quite some time now. I have usb support using the usb-backport stuff so that my usb webcam and intellieye mouse works. I've got the pcmcia package so that my ethernet card and modem works. I use reiserfs and I have the appropriate reiser patch for this kernel revision. This is a laptop so I shouldn't really be concerning myself with speed issues since I'm the only user on the system all the time. Unless this kernel patches some major security holes, why should I get this new kernel?
Is there something new with this kernel or with the new 2.4 series of kernels that would want to make me compile a new kernel?
Bios updates for motherboards come out every so often, and people always feel the need to have the newest bios on their system. But if everything works perfectly, there should be no reason to flash the bios. If everything on my computer is supported by my current kernel, why should I feel the need to update my kernel?
catch23
As the Anonymous Coward pointed out - Take care the last link could cause you some embarrassment in the office. *pron*. Someone Moderate that Coward!
The world is SUPPOSED to present you with surprises, and you're SUPPOSED to modify your world-view based on those things. To deny being surprised by the world is to calcify your world-view. That's dangerous.
Filtering your news is close to filtering those surprises. It may be a valid argument that filtering Katz is not the same as filtering news. Still, I enjoy some Katz articles, though I frequently only skim them.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
Hate to rain on your party, but according to Linus, they still have a way to go to catch up with 2.0. He says the first few 4.0 will not have the ideal VM balance. The hard part is dealing with all the different usage patterns in a sane manner...
-- http://thegirlorthecar.com funny dating game for guys
Yes, the scaling issues have been fixed in 2.4.
:)
The scheduler has been completely reworked as has the SMP stability.
The 2.4 kernel although does not have everything in it, is the first kernel to truly address some enterprise level concerns.
It even includes RAW devices for databases
Get your PostgreSQL here: http://www.commandprompt.com/
The deal is that there is always something that somebody things is unworthy of coverage. The hardcore linux guys deride Mac coverage, the mac folks are bored with "rms catches a cold: says 'linukths'" stories, Amiga nuts think it's unfair Quake has it's own category, javaheads think c# gets too much air time, space junkies think anime is a waste, everyone hates the book reviews... yatta yatta.
For a significant portion of readers, this is news. Period. If your don't care about it, don't read it... if you really don't care about it, go to your prefs and ditch the penguin picture
2 1337 4 u!
I'd like to start this by saying that I am NOT speaking for Red Hat in this, but for myself.
/from it/ to the 2.2.x series, so that it doesn't fall too far behind.
I started working at Red Hat about 2 months ago, and I can say that since I have been here, I've been continually impressed by the extent to which everyone works to make sure everything works. No one EVER talks about steering development 'backwards', as its damn hard enough keeping it going forwards.
Now, the 2.4.0 kernel is a BIG deal, it is a big change, and it will save the world, clean your laundry, get you dates, clear up your acne, etc, etc. But it is not finnished. Period. There is more to do on it, and while work continues on it, some code is backported
But should Red Hat wait until 2.4? How about KDE 2.0, or Gnome 2.0, or Gimp 2.0, or Jargon 3.0? How long do you wait, for what? They can't, they have to make sure that the software that they put the stamp on is as uptodate as it reasonably can be, while simultaneously being as stable, and as compatible.
And how can you seriously believe that Red Hat is purposely steering development to slow the advent of the 2.4 kernel? Did you see the Slashdot article about Tux? That is a 2.4 kernel based webserver, something that is VERY cool, and it'd be great for Red Hat if it worked out of the box. But it doesn't, cause 2.4 is not finnished.
If you really have issues with the speed of the development cycle of 2.4, help the kernel developers.
-- Crutcher --
#include <disclaimer.h>
-- Crutcher --
#include <disclaimer.h>
fluxrad said:
Metrol replied:
Well, you're both right on some points but wrong on others. fluxrad is right that a SP is not the same as a kernel upgrade, and Metrol is right that a Linux kernel update doesn't update the whole OS. (FWIW, Metrol seems to have a better idea of what's going on here... not sure if sarcasm is getting in the way here. :-)
A Windows Service Pack upgrades the kernel as well as a large number of system DLLs and utilities. It's effectively a point release of the OS by another name. (eg. In a different world, NT4SP6 might've been named NT 4.6. My personal theory is that changes in version number need to go through more approval processes than a "service pack" might at a large number of big, stodgy companies.) The major architecture of the OS doesn't typically change between SP's, but the SP touches just about everything.
In contrast, a Linux kernel upgrade touches just the kernel. No system libraries, no utilities, no user-land drivers, just the kernel. It is not an OS-wise upgrade.
This bears repeating: By itself, the Linux kernel is not an OS. The Linux kernel plus a usable userland environment is.
I think the main reason 2.2.17 is out as compared to some of the other revs of Linux 2.2.x is that 2.2.17 has been a long time coming. And to think I just installed 2.2.17pre20. Anyone have diffs between 2.2.17pre20 and 2.2.17final?
--Joe--
Program Intellivision!
Why is there no code versioning system for the Linux kernel? Will there ever be, ie. will the devtree be moved to some kind of CVS in the future?
I never dared to ask, thinking there's an obvious reason why there is no CVS for Linux, but I'm not so sure anymore. I sure would like to be able to browse the code without having to download the whole thing.
Sigged!
Actually we have seen a beta built around the 2.4 pres, The mandrake 7.2 that was just released. I agree with RedHat's decision to put a 2.4 in 7.0, They have a product almost ready to ship in a hopefully stable state. By the time 7.1 rolls around 2.4 will have a couple point releases under it's belt and will probably ship with 7.1. If for some reason they don't want a new kernel in a point release, RedHat can ship an 8.0 with the possibly released GNOME 1.4 and the new GPL Open Office suite.
I don't think that releasing an upgrade with a 2.4 would be much of an issue though. I seem to remember Bero saying that the main identifier of a .0 release was breaking binary compatibility, which most certainly isn't going to happen with a new kernel. Pinstripe (7.0 beta) is already compiled against the 2.4 headers even though it runs on a 2.2 (2.2.17-pre1[[0-9]).
treke
Well, a better "summary" is at Alan's page here.
Yeah, I've had that prob. Not with deb tho'. With SuSE 6.2. I think it's my old cirrus logic graphics. It hasn't happened so far with the new linbox I'm building with an HIS Rage IIc video card. Mind you, the old box is a 486 and I'm running KDE and StarOffice, which is probably more than that box can handle.
Yuri
Show me a fossil of a half-evolved eye.
You make the mistake of thinking you can educate the fundamental stupidity out of people. You can't.
Oh, wait a second...
I heard the 2.2 series had serious scaling problems under heavy load, but I can not remember the cause. Does anyone know if these problems have been addressed in the newer 2.4 series? This really worries me, considering 2.0 outperforms 2.2 under heavy load in many cases. Could someone a little more knowledgable about the situation reply...
Downloaded and compiled great. I even applied the cuecat-0.0.8 patch for 2.2.16, and it worked flawless (see earlier /. articals if you have no idea what patch I am talking about). Actually, I wonder if it is two late to work the scanner into 2.4.....(grinning at the powers that be).
My Linux box crashed today after 56 days of uptime. (Quite mysteriously indeed, I just pressed Shift and boom, the boot texts came immediately but that's not important) I then waited the machine to check quite uncleanly unmounted partitions and when I started irc, my friend MSG'ed me and told that 2.2.17 is out. I had planned to wait until next hardware upgrade to compile the whatever-to-be version of that time, but now I have no uptime to lose! ;)
Somehow I almost could think that my machine subtly noticed that 2.2.17 is out and it's really time to upgrade old and buggier 2.2.13, and decided to make the point clear to me. ;)
Everyone who makes generalizations should be shot.
Why do I see people who have clearly been reading slashdot for less than a year saying that a stable kernel release isn't slashdot material? There was a time when 10% of all the slashdot news was kernel releases.
Besides, what harm does it do you? Shut up and stop bitching at Rob 'n' crew.
--
I'll keep this brief, Slashdot is not about "us geeks" it's about what rob malda finds interesting. This does not include NT, but does include linux, I personally think both have their place and try to stay as operating system agnostic as possible, but you can't expect everyone to do the same. Slashdot has ALWAYS been about what Rob Malda finds interesting, and judging by your user number you should know that.
cheese logs keep my wang warm at night.
The reason new features are being added to the stable series is largely to keep the 2.2.x kernels able to support recently improved features (new and updated hardware drivers, tuned algorithms, etc). If it weren't for this, then we'd be stuck with a kernel that required massive patching to support any newer hardware or improved features. Additionally, since the changes are relatively not very intrusive, and are pretty thoroughly tested in the -dev tree, the people running production boxes on 2.2.x kernels can be confident that the kernel is still solid, even with the new features.
;)
The reason 2.x.x *appears* to be incrementing more rapidly than 2.4.x in some areas is because all the cool new stuff (RAID code, USB, PCMCIA, etc ad infinitum...) has been in development (2.3.x) for a long time, and has been pretty thoroughly wrung out. In other words, all the initial "hard work" has largely been done. It's finally been deemed stable in the 2.4 series, and is now being backported for the benefit of those less adventurous souls (like me) who prefer a well-used, known-good kernel (2.2.x) on production systems, but want the benefit of some new features. The same thing happened with backports of 2.2 features into the 2.0.37+ kernels, even after 2.2 was released. Instead of a massive overhaul, with an entirely new kernel architecture to deal with, you get the shiny new stuff (new hardware support, bugfixes, and tuneups) and still get to stay with the tried-and-true kernel you're used to using.
That's likely why RedHat is developing their next distro to 2.2.x, *not* 2.4. After all, 2.4 is still considered a moving target at this point, and is extremely difficult to develop to (Alan Cox mentioned this in a recent diary entry). If you've got an entire distro to worry about, best to keep it with the currently stable and well-known 2.2 kernel, instead of a constantly-changing 2.4-test kernel.
Besides, if you really want to be cutting edge, go get slackware or rabbid squirrel and build your own distro with whatever software versions you want. This is Free software, after all -- if you've got an itch, scratch it!
Does anyone know if this release has full support for ATA/100? I really want to put linux on my shiny new 800MHz Tbird, however, I really don't want to waste my time downloading over my 28.8 modem only to find no support for my computer.
Seriously, Win2k and Win98 do not support ATA/100 without 3rd party drivers. It would be nice if Linux could get ahead of the game with this.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
Should slashdot also announce microsoft service packs as well?
---
I say Rob should pull out a week's worth of Classic Slashdot, from a couple years ago, and post it somewhere. We could then compare the content of THEN with the content of NOW.
/. for a few years now, and I prefer to read a new kernel announcement, where I can pickup tidbits like "it screwed my ext2" or "won't boot on my 8-way Celery bawx" than read about how Bill Gates just hired Larry Ellison to clean his indoor pool!
I've been reading
I agree. I come to slashdot because I want to stay informed. It needn't be groundbreaking, but I think a new stable kernel affects many of us who run / admin Linux boxen.
If slashdot wouldn't have reported on the new kernel, when would I have found out? Not that I check kernel.org everyday, and edge.kernelnotes.org are so behind it's not even funny!
Figured it out... :)
/usr/src/linux/.config file to my new linux src directory the running 'make oldconfig'.
:) Thank god this isn't a mission critical box.
I think.
I found a small reference in the README to copying my
This method prompted me for any new features that have been added and I'm assuming it will compile.
Can anyone confirm that this is correct? Before I install this kernal remotely and reboot, dooming my machine to be down for 6 hours while I wait till I get home
- Xabbu
- Jimbob
correction: Company paid 4K for i810 box.
Non-Deterministic Finite Automata
800MHz Thunderbird with ATA/100 and a 28.8 modem?
um... what's wrong with this picture?
- Improve AARP handling (Alistair Riddell)
AARP? isn't that the Old Folks [retirement] thing or another?
"sorry grandpa, your arthritis aside, you really DO need a 3 button mouse. maybe the AARP can suggest one for you"
--
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Absolutely. Many uf us "geeks" run NT on some systems (not really by choice, but hey). It would be nice if Slashdot reported on NT Server / Win2000 service pack releases. Microsoft's website is soooo difficult to navigate that having that info here on slashdot would be a big asset!
---
The windows 98 ( well, ME these days ) of the unix world....