Slashdot Mirror
Serious Bug In 2.4.15/2.5.0
John Ineson writes: "There is a bug in the latest kernel releases, that causes fs corruption on umount. A lot of people have already been hit by this, so for now I suggest you hold fire on booting those new kernels. More dead-duck than greased-turkey. Two possible fixes are being discussed on linux-kernel."
Colin Bayer adds links to a story at the Register and Al Viro's fix. Update: 11/25 00:39 GMT by T : Tarkie writes "Linux 2.4.16-pre1 is out, as detailed at NewsForge. If you've been having the filesystem corruptions, might be worth a try so that 2.4.16 can be out ASAP!"
From the looks of the post this bug occurs regardless of filesystem. Is that accurate? or would certain fs's be unaffected, im guessing that it doesnt matter, anyone care to clarify that
Good thing we have alan cox who tries to keep his tree somewhat more stable. Anyone know if his kernels were affected?
No problems with this kernel pre release :)
Everyone wants a Tux in their life.
When are we going to start giving kernels to a QA team before releasing them?
I am not a lawyer. Do not take my words as legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult an attorney.
...how something like this could have creeped in, and be missed? Was it a last-minute change that just didn't have time for testing, or was it (bad)luck-of-the-draw that no one noticed it?
I recomment turning your computer off with the power switch or by unplugging it, after you've made sure you can boot an older kernel. Since umounting is done when you shut down cleanly, you don't want to do that.
They that quote Benjamin Franklin on liberty and safety deserve neither.
for the brasilian guy, hum ?
Well, this is not the first, and probably it won't be the last too, dangerous boog in the 2.4 series. IIRC (too lazy today to check) 2.4.11 is marked as "do not use" in the kernel mirrors.
What ? Me, worry ?
You can find Andrea Arcangeli's fix at:n drea/kernels/v2.4/2.4.15aa1/00_iput-unmount-corrup tion-fix-1
ftp://ftp.us.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/a
The users are the QA (why do you think Linus moved to 2.4 so early? To get more testers). If you don't like being a guinea pig, then wait about a week before moving to the newest kernel. Seriously, 7 days isn't that long, and all show-stoppers will have shown up long before then.
Dude. I hate to say this, but Windows 2000, while it may crash more, doesn't hose you're filesystem nearly as often as Linux seems to these days. At what point do we get to start making the LinSux jokes?
PS> Don't flame me please. I just wiped Win2K off my harddrive this morning. Luckily, I downloaded the 2.4.15 tree but have been too lazy to compile it yet.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Isn't the 2.4 branch supposed to be stable? You know, the one that doesn't eat your disk. I think that this kernel should have gotten a little more testing for bugs of the catastrophic nature before it was deemed fit for general consumption.
Yet there's no snide commentary from the editors whenever something like this happens with Microsoft (M$ to all the haters) software.
Maybe you zealots will realize that nobody is perfect, and open-source is not necessarily better than closed-source.
This also makes a case for not announcing new kernels not slashdot (aka not freshmeat). Most people here are linux newbie wannabees so they're not the most qualified people to be running the latest and greatest kernels.
Well a least it is more secure...
I hope /. dosent mangle this up too bad, but if it does:
0 658174003122&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=10
List: linux-kernel
Subject: Re: 2.4.15-pre9 breakage (inode.c)
From: Linus Torvalds
Date: 2001-11-24 5:55:42
[Download message RAW]
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> --- 2.4.15pre9aa1/fs/inode.c.~1~ Thu Nov 22 20:48:23 2001
> +++ 2.4.15pre9aa1/fs/inode.c Sat Nov 24 06:30:20 2001
> @@ -1071,7 +1071,7 @@
> if (inode->i_state != I_CLEAR)
> BUG();
> } else {
> - if (!list_empty(&inode->i_hash) && sb && sb->s_root) {
> + if (!list_empty(&inode->i_hash)) {
> if (!(inode->i_state & (I_DIRTY|I_LOCK))) {
> list_del(&inode->i_list);
> list_add(&inode->i_list, &inode_unused);
I have to say that I like this patch better myself - the added tests are
not sensible, and just removing them seems to be the right thing.
Linus
This is a common misconception! 2.4 is *not* "stable"! It is "testing"! Well, now that it's split in two I suppose it can officially be called "stable" (what a bad start!), but I don't consider it stable (though I'm just a lowly AC). AFAIC, 2.2 = "stable" and 2.4 = "testing". In a month or so, things we'll change and we'll have 2.4 = "stable" and 2.5 = "experimental". Until 2.5 turns into 2.6/3.0, at which point it will be "testing", and the cycle continues :)
that a successful reboot of the system running the kernel is not in the regression suite. Does this error occur on every architecture?
The author has very valid advice. Yet, some moderator marked this post a "troll." That's like saying Click and Clack on NPR are opponents of the automobile industry.
I am not a lawyer. Do not take my words as legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult an attorney.
You would still have to be careful until then - people who regularly mount and unmout read/write might want to be careful. I wonder if mounting read-only would help, or if the bug is below that level (from the discussion, it doesn't sound like it)?
They that quote Benjamin Franklin on liberty and safety deserve neither.
Come on guys, nobody is going to take linux seriously as long as problems like this -- or the VM saga -- keep popping up in supposedly stable kernels. FreeBSD has no trouble keeping separate -CURRENT and -STABLE trees; why can't linux do the same?
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
In your face! I sat here and read all the flames to apple about the iTunes screw up, and here we are with one just as big and glaring from the kernel developers themselves.
Hypocrites!!!!!!!
FS corruption is FS corruption, you can't justify it at all, especially since this is supposed to be a stable kernel. It can't be all that obscure if it's changed enough since the last revision to do damage now could it?
Welcome to "why not to grab every new piece of software as soon as it's released". Other examples include Apple's iTunes 2 and MS Windows 98 (first edition). Also works for hardware, and heck, even cars (first year of a new model is usually riddled with problems).
rooooar
Can someone give a joe-user guide to helping test new kernels?
The last post in that thread is this one by Andrea Arcangeli sometime this morning and from the looks of things (if you read the entire thread) there is conflict between Alexander Viro and Andrea on which is the better solution.
Linus saying he prefers a patch on an initial viewing isn't the end of the situation for now. I'd suggesting waiting a week and revisiting the thread to find out what the final word was.
I have to wonder, with all the bizarre bugs that have been creeping into "stable" kernels... are they even being tested before release, or is Linus just slapping on some patches and putting out a new kernel as 2.4. instead of 2.4.-prewhatever?
The latter would seem to indicate frustration and burnout on his part.
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
... is why there seems to exist this rampant tendency among Linux-folk to upgrade one's kernel constantly. Unless a new kernel solves a problem you have, there is no reason to upgrade.
If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
For those who have tried ext3 in 2.4.15:
/dev/whatever".
Make sure you have reset the journaling flag on your filesystems, because your older kernel will not mount an unclean ext3 volume.
Do a "tune2fs -O ^has_journal
I had an fs corruption with RH 7.2, using the kernel that came with the distro. It trashed the geometry of an entire drive. I was using a combo of ext2 and ext3 on the drive. I didn't lose anything, as I backup my system regularly.
I've since migrated to Mandrake 8.1, which is much more solid than RH 7.2. Yet, it too runs a 2.4 kernel variant. This distro on one boot failed to recognize the ext3 partitions. I migrated all of the ext3 partitions back to ext2.
I'd be very interested in learning if this is a problem that extends far back into the kernel tree.
Graham
Linux - Fast Pane Relief
I compiled and ran 2.4.15 for few hours and now I'm back to 2.4.14. As for me it appears my file system is intact. At least I don't think I did. How do I know for sure my files won't disappear on me? What kind of error messages would I see if my file system is corrupt? How do I correct it?
Ok, no if this is still in "testing" forgive me.
Should this darn thing be tested before it's released as "final"! I mean just a few weeks ago you guys were bashing Apple for their iTunes install that wrecked the hard drive, and now you're just coming up with solutions. How bout complaints? How about "This code should never have been released with such a serious bug". Again if this is test code then fine, it comes with the territory. Even if it's "Implied" test code, that's not good enough.
The mailing list converted tabs into spaces, causing patch to choke. Get the patch here.
This is one reason why distributions are so important. They do the QA, they make sure packages are stable, they apply the patches. If you want to download and run the latest edition of every package out, including the kernel, then you should expect some bumps in the road, because you are beta testing - even on a "stable" kernel series. Remember: release early, release often. You will have to do the QA, you will have to apply the patches, you will be burned. Some people like doing this to stay on the bleeding edge, others are a bit more cautious.
If you want stable, solid kernels, that are heavily QA'd wait for packages to come out. Otherwise, post a bug report, and quit whining.
------ 24.5% slashdot pure
If only this was Open Source Software, the source code could have been examined by thousands of highly motivated and intelligent hackers, who would have noticed the problem immediately. Wait....
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
It's rotted.
Nope, no sir. I'm sticking with 2.4.11.
No room for credit in your sig?
Actually, no there wasn't. The 120 char limit on sigs is a pain. I tried shortening the quote a little bit all I ended up being able to do was get as far as "Lord Oml" before running out of room. If it bothers you that much I can change my sig.
PS:Moderators don't bother modding this thread down as offtopic, that's what the [OT] in the subject is for. Instead go find something insightful or informative to mod up instead.
> So who else is downloading 2.5 (Score:5, Funny)
> by Chuck Chunder on Friday November 23, @02:23AM
>
> so they can be cool and trendy and be on the development tree while it's still stable?
>
> The Great Chunder Page - Alcohol Induced Fun!
If you didn't think it was funny before, admit it -- it's pretty damn funny now.
Grrr... Definitely time for a three-pronged development. STABLE, TESTING, DEVEL, trees, please!
And would it kill them to use a versioning system ??? - CVS is great, but there's other options, too...
This sort of thing is NOT good, in a supposedly "stable" tree, and gives MS, BSD, and proprietary Unix folk lots of Ammo against Linux.
To be fair, people adminning production boxes should be using the kernels from their Distro's site, since, really, it's the distro that is the OS, and RH, SuSe, and Mandrake all heavily regression-test and fine tune their kernel, it's not necessary to be on the bleeding-edge.
To avoid corruption on unmount, simply type
# sync
before you unmount the filesystem, as the bug only affects dirty inodes(so mounting ro would fix it). Also, if you can't or don't want to physically pull the plug, you could always do a
# telinit S
#
# umount
# sync
# reboot
There was a mail that read something like this on LKML, but I'm having trouble finding it. You might want to find it if you're thinking about shutting down that way, just in case I forgot something horribly stupid.
It seems the second set of commands got mangled, sorry:
telinit S
kill everything but your shell
sync
unmount everything but root
sync
reboot
Bugs happen and now you're criticizing people who go it fixed in a very short time. How about being fair and telling it to Microsoft when they fuck up and don't fix for weeks?
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
for once I'm glad i have 56k and decided against downloading the new kernel just yet. for all those bitching cause their system got hosed. well what did you expect? thats why you wait for the next post on slashdot saying somethings wrong with the new kernel. besides what about 2.4.15 was so necessary that you had to have the latest incremental kernel? I'm rather happy with 2.4.8. unless you're a developer/bug-tester/bleed-freak what reason do you have to upgrade to the very latest kernel?
-
Weren't there more testers to catch this sort of thing before?
I think that ReiserFS might be able to cope with it. The transaction log is not stored in/as inodes, therefore the transaction log replay should fix the B*Tree of data if it's broken. I'm not sure of other journalling filesystems... I'm glad I use raw partitions for my MySQL/InnoDB databases :) I could be wrong about the ReiserFS thing, so if anyone has any info to the contrary, it would be much appreciated. It only seems logical that FS's that were written for the possibility that Inodes wouldn't be flushed would be just fine.
:) I'ld rather know now than when I actually need to run the kernel.
BTW... has anyone ever seen NTFS corrupt. I've seen it happen to many before. It's not pretty... you can't recover a single file. Still its better than FAT (with all the corruption there, I wonder why it hasn't formed it's own lifeform from the randomness) Still... this is no excuse for not testing software/major changes in a stable tree.
Those who say that no one should have downloaded the new kernel just aren't thinking. We all should for this particular reason. We need to find the bugs fast and keep our beloved kernel developers on their toes
Karma Clown
So, will we start seeing -post releases?
Heh. I can see it now. 2.4.15-post1 :)
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
As an owner of a lovely IBM 75GXP hdd, I can say Win2k fixes corrupted files on NTFS pretty well. NT4 is perhaps a different ballgame, there you have the chance to indeed get stuck with files which are not recoverable at all.
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
And what the fuck does Microsoft have to do with any of this?
Is there any project to create a set of regression tests for the Linux kernel? This is not the first serious bug that would have been found with even the most basic set of regression tests.
Linux makes a very nice workstation OS, but things like this that cause me to recommend FreeBSD for the server...
I've never heard of something like this happening in FreeBSD-STABLE.
While Linux may have more cutting edge features and perhaps has some speed advantages (this is debatable), the FreeBSD (and OpenBSD too!) coders are more conservative about what gets integrated into something which is supposedly stable.
BSD gives you more peace of mind IMHO.
The moving cursor writes, and having written, blinks on.
It amazes me how big of a deal people make these types of issues out to be. I have heard of high standards but SH*T!. The more I read slashdot the more I realize that very few posters here actully work with much commerical grade software. These type of issues occure freqently with every software vendor I deal with professionally: Cisco, Microsoft, IBM, RedHat, Checkpoint ect.. ect.. The difference is when Cisco releases a new IOS image (which they do about twice as freqently as Linus does) They will quitely mark saym a 1/4th of them DF which stands for _DEFFERED_ i.e. SERIOUS BUG DON'T USE once it is discovered.
This is why production implentations of software go through testing before deployment when at all possible. If you are running Cisco IOS that is say less then a month old you are taking a risk that there will be a serious bug that will hurt you. The same holds true for Linux kernels or any other peice of software. The more complicated the software the harder it is to keep serious bugs from slipping through the cracks, It is _AMAZING_ that Linux has a few major issues as it does.
Here is an exercise for you all: Go to www.microsoft.com go to their support section and read through all of the changelogs (they are hard to find) for all of the hot fixes, service packs and general software updates and you will see what I mean (And yes you will find file system corruption there too).
-- You can be a geeklord too
I've seen lots of posts about 'We need to QA this!'
and 'Are there any projects to try and QA the kernel releases?' Both of these miss the point. While we do need more people running the tests which do exist on the -pre releases, it comes down to Linus having an itchy trigger finger, so to speak. 2.4.15 in it's final form did exist for a little while, but it wasn't long enough for anyone to go and give it a good test. There's often been requests for Linus to wait a few days from the last -pre to -final so other arches and sync up (2.4.15 only compiles on x86/sparc64/arm and alpha). If this was released on monday, none of this would happen.
Just wanted to remind you that testing doesn't guarantee lack of errors, it's only the other way around (lack of testing guarantees errors). Even with tons of testing, showstoppers still make it to public releases.
...
The only problem is that a lot people download the latest kernel imediately after its release and put it on a production machine. My message to them (to you): "You're nothing but insane!". IMHO this should be a very valuable lesson to you
The Raven
The Raven
The real problem is that new functionality is being added to the stable branch.
The solution to this type of problem is simple, when a stable kernel is released, an unstable branch should be created immedately. New functionality was being added to the 2.4 branch by developers simply because there is nowhere else to put it.
New functionality should never be added to a stable branch in a piece of software as mission-critical as a kernel, that is what the unstable/development branch is for.
If the kernel maintainers want to accelorate the pace at which new functionality gets into a stable branch then they should increase the frequency with which development branches become stable.
You're _SO_ funny! Hahahaha!
::sigh:: If you want a complete in-house-tested Linux OS, and you don't want to be a beta tester, get something like Debian stable.
Yes, it's stale and out of date when compared with other distributions (e.g. Debian unstable), and yes, the default kernel is 2.2.19 (and when the current testing distribution becomes Debian 3.0, they're probably going to include a 2.2 kernel with that too). This is the price you pay for stability.
Here's the difference in philosophy:
MS: Only use the next version of Windows in-house until they're confident that it's nearly ready, then release it to beta testers, then fix bugs they report, then release when they're confident that it's ready.
Linux kernel team: Release N.N.NNpreN versions until it's nearly ready, then release a "final" version; let distributions and "advanced users" (i.e. those who compile their own kernels) decide where they want to be on the spectrum going from cutting-edge features to known reliability.
When do you think the Windows kernel developers last made major (i.e. non-bugfix) changes to, say, the released WinXP kernel, anyway? Probably quite a while back... and yet nobody complains about that, precisely because we never see the latest version until it's considered stable and used in Windows ZQ or something in a couple of years.
hey, if 2.4.15 causes you trouble, then don't use it.
You don't have to be on the bleeding edge. (I chose 2.4.15-pre6 because it fixed a DRM issue that affects 4.1.0), I was happy with 2.4.6.
I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
Between this and the security hole that surfaced recently, the kernel has had some really scary problems. I'm wondering if this latest problem could have been avoided?
Expecting a OS to not destroy files is not holding a high standard. Just the opposite.
I have been testing ever since I first heard whispers of this bug this morning and both of my test machines (one VIA KT266A/AthlonXP, one 440BX/dual pentium-II) which use ReiserFS seem completely unaffected... More after continued testing.
-----------------------------------------
Remove the Greed which plagues mankind.
Windows is the place where Bill Gates displays all of the ideas he's stolen, and all of the companies he's crushed. It's a museum dedicated to the multifarious ways in which greed and power corrupt. I wouldn't use his OS even if it was worth a shit. As for being "a paradign of total customer satisfaction", I'm surprised most Windows users can get any work done at all. I mean holding a mouse with your right hand and your nose with the other doesn't leave a hand free to do anything else...
The trouble with practical jokes is that very often they get elected. -- Will Rogers
When the so-called stable kernel can be released with such a huge bug, how can we tell the managers that Linux is stable and hassle-free?
Really - we need to make scripts that test right about every critical aspect of a kernel. That would be file systems, VM, IPC, SMP, hardware drivers, SCSI, IDE, ethernet, token ring and more.
Has anybody made such scripts? One thing is a broken, obscure driver, another thing is bugs that break everybody - like VM and now unmount.
Stop the brainwash
Installed 2.4.15 the day this post came out. GAH! Now trying to deinstall the bird and go back to 2.4.14, and no matter what I do it says it's the greased turkey.
Back to 2.2.19 now to recompile 2.4.14...
--
# Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
$Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
These sorts of things should not creep into the STABLE kernel series.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
fs/fs.o: In function `dput':
fs/fs.o(.text+0x118a8): undefined reference to `atomic_dec_and_lock'
make: *** [vmlinux] Error 1
Well, at least you aren't expecting me to bitch about microsoft, in this totally unrelated story, anymore.
This is sorta like the glitch in 2.4.11, only worse...
This bug had already been mentioned on a post on the original article that informed us of 2.5's release.
5 154
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=24074&cid=260
What happened? Didn't anyone take this seriously?
void women (int money, time_t time);
Take this post as a challenge. Reply with a link that shows that there is/was a bug in Redhat Linux 7 that caused the loss of an ENTIRE FILE SYSTEM.
The point (which I'm sure you'll miss, but anyway) is that linux-2.4.15.tar.gz is not an operating system. Anyone with the knowhow to download, compile, and install 2.4.15 from source had better be able to run fsck when something like this happens.
Furthermore you way overstate the case when you assert this causes lost file systems. The vast majority of 2.4.15 corruption cases can be repaired with a fsck.
Personally, I consider the code red II worm to be a far greater threat to my data than linux-2.4.15.tar.gz.
Now it can only get better :-)
http://www.millnet.se/ GO/U d- s+:+ a C++ UL++++ P- L+++ E W+++ N+ w++ M-- PE+ t+ X++
Whoa.. I was running it there for a few minutes until I saw this.. then I compiled 2.4.14 right away and rebooted, there don't seem to be any problems yet.
This all makes me wonder, though, about 2.4. I mean it seems like there have been relatively many "big" problems with 2.4 throughout its life. 2.4.10 had the SMP thing, 2.4.15 has this, and there have been other problems big enough to pretty much make a version unusable.
I don't seem to remember as much of this happening with 2.2, I mean obviously every major new version of the kernel will be rough around the edges for the first few releases, but 2.2 seemed not to have as many of these big problems. So, what's going on, are kernels getting worse or am I just smocking crack?
"Caffeine is not an option. Caffeine is a way of life."
I'm a complete Linux Newbie, so please don't mod me down for just asking. Was there ever a kernal 2.3? Or will we be seeing it when 2.2 reaches a certain development point?
Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
Since I first started using linux there have been two development trees.. 2.even.x [stable] and 2.odd.x [unstable].
What makes one more stable than the other?
There must not be too much testing of these so called bug fixes going on. I mean a simple reboot seems to be all that was needed to bring this bug to light.
I would really like to know that when a "stable" kernel comes out that it has at least been tested somewhat before release. As the kernel grows larger I sense that these problems will increase in frequency.
I found a patch that solves the problem TOTALLY! The URL is www.freebsd.org
Linux Sucks by the way
<pseudo-rant>
maybe there's a good side to your ISP going out of business and qwest dsl fscking you over changing your isp, making it harder to update your kernel 8)
</pseudo-rant>
but ultimately, i can't see its all that big of a deal. all you have to do is take a couple of weeks to get to the newest kernel. wait till its been out a fortnight, and you're golden
Brian Voils
"A university is what a college becomes when the faculty loses interest in students."
Look, writing software is difficult, and anything as complicated and flexible as the Linux kernel is a management headache, to say the least.
It's fine and dandy to say "don't add new features in the stable series", but then what about important features like USB? When the 2.2 kernel series went stable, USB was a pipe-dream, so at around 2.2.15 (IIRC) USB was back-ported into the 2.2 kernel. This was generally considered a GOOD THING, not too risky.
Even when not adding new features, sometimes just fixing bugs can cause new bugs to appear. A fact of software development is that sometimes things like this happen. Unforseen necessity can destabilize stable software. Try as we might, following proper coding practices and the like, writing software has continued to be hard simply by virtue of its complexity. Writing software is somewhat of a craft, not a pure engineering, and sometimes things don't go as planned (think leaky pottery).
Ultimately, though, the goal is to improve the process as much as possible, keep/sell the "good" products (such as kernel 2.4.14) and throw away the ones that developed leaks (such as 2.4.15).
What Linus needs to find is a crack team of kernel breakers. People with varieties of hardware. They need to build an automated testing tool that would automatically put the release kernel through thousands of iterations of tests, to ensure that nothing is wrong. What they need is a GNU/Autotest for testing kernels in a peer-to-peer SETI@home style, on non essential machines.
David
MS has 36 billion bucks. Linux is a volunteer effort.
Why is is that they are even in competition, again? Why is it MS can't buy some fucking good PROGRAMMING???
..including the patch for this bug. get it here
Don't you have to reboot to make the patch work? Does'nt that require an unmount?
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
The 2.4.15 bug didn't bite me. Of course, Slackware's shutdown script runs sync automatically.
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
People downloading kernels from kernel.org, particularly in the first few days of a release, are part of the QA process, not the ultimate beneficiaries of one.
The Open Source (or more correctly, bazaar or distributed) development model also distributes responsibility. If the possibility of losing your data is something you can't afford then you simply shouldn't be sitting on the cutting edge of kernel development.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
I think I'm just anti-anti-microsoft, that's all. I think they get beat up far too often for things that aren't always their fault.
If God gave us curiosity
There's the OS for you, typical piece of untested fucked up crap.
Oh, wait. This is Linux we're talking about. Hmmm. OK, I know:
Go Linus! Go Alan! Go kernel Gods! We're sure this is a very minor thing that will be fixed in no time! It doesn't matter!! We can take anything!! We love you!!!
Micro$soft sucks! Linux roolz!!!1!!!
OK, now moderate up, si vouz plez.
This is just the the thing "my mother/reast of the world except the converted" has against Linux.. Non "fully" tested code coming out a "stable" release...
Marcelo your first priority should be to come up with a plausible patch plan.. ie:
<UL>
<LI>There should be more than a few days between patches, preferably months.</LI>
<LI>There should be a REAL test task force, not
only rely on "nerds".</LI>
</UL>
Without STABILITY Linux will NEVER succeed...
And for Linus on the 2.5 side: Come up with a plan where the kernel is EASY to update.. We "nerds" know how to do this.. But the "TOTAL WORLD DOMINATION" is about the non "nerd/technical" people...
-- Kalle Kiviaho - kivi@picox.se -- Another day, another coma..
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Well, at least 2.5 was fucked up! Now nobody can really say that 2.5 was ever stable!
...that make me glad I switched to FreeBSD a while ago. /usr/src and do some rebuilding to update. No waiting for a release.
Linux does have a lot of things I miss - DRI/DRM still isn't working right, X and GTK in particular seem a bit slower - but it's absolutely rock solid. I've only managed to crash it once, and that was my own fault - loaded a KLD from 4.4-RELEASE into a 4.4-STABLE kernel. Nice panic there.
The ports system also is really nice; it could do dependencies a bit better, but it's generally fairly smart about it. And having the entire system source on dosk and available is nice.
I like how the system is in CVS - bugs get patched and fixes checked in fast, and all one has to do is a 'make update' in
-- Veni, vidi, dormivi
It doesn't, I was just curious. Stupid 120 char limit.
[o]_O
If you've been having the filesystem corruptions,
*Everybody* will get corruption using 2.4.15/2.5.0, just don't use it.
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
> pre6: fix Intel 8xx agptlb flush Oooh, thats my board! This gives me hope that i can run linux again on my P4 1.4Ghz longer then 15 minutes without a hardware lockup.
2.0.x is still being maintained as well. So whats that make it, the extra-stable branch? :P
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
I am not sure whats going on these days, but things like this are poping up way too much in the stable kernels over the past 2 months. The 2.2 series kernel had issues, but not this offtean. Plus, memory management wasn't as serious. (as far as the eariley 2.4 issues)
:)
/proc, which I find VERY usefull), I would think about switching, or dual booting. Most likley, moving my server over. BSD is quite stable compaired to Linux over the recent months. Its just not as easy to use.
Linus said when 2.3 was started that 2.4 would be a smaller quicker release style. I am wondering if that was a bad idea. Too much changed in 2.4, I think it really affected its development. I would rather see 2.5 development stopped ASAP to fix 99% of the 2.4 issues before going on. I could careless if 2.5 took another 2 years before it was started, as long as 2.4 was stable.
Becuase of all these recent events, I have decied to wait at LEAST 2 weeks before upgrading kernels. Durring 2.2 (at eailry 2.4) I would upgrade within a few hours of release. (By the time I found out
_if_ BSD would provide the same things that Linux can, (for example, a full
Anyway, I really hope things start improving.
until (succeed) try { again(); }
Nice and stable. Forget the Idea that it's rarely updated, and when it is you don't see anything but the finished product. I saw the C=128 is up to Commodore Basic V7, but thats too risky for me. I prefer to stay with the good ole rock solid stuff.
Well sombody had to say it.
Opinions Expressed by Me should be Forced on Others - PbHead
Yeah we have high standards. If not we'd write the stuff ourselves right? ;)
Seriously tho, what do you want, a Linux that's slightly less unstable than Windows. Or a Linux that's actually stable.
I don't understand why so many people here are using Microsoft to show why Linux isn't that bad.
This is STABILITY we are talking about. If you have to resort to mentioning Microsoft then Linux has become rather bad hasn't it?
If you are talking Joe Public acceptability then yeah mention Microsoft.
Maybe Linux should go towards the FreeBSD style of releasing - STABLE, CURRENT, DEVELOPMENT.
More regression tests before an actual release would help too.
Cheerio,
Link.
Microsoft is a business. They pretend they have feelings to affect people like you. How can anyone feel sorry for a company that has $35 billion dollars in the bank. (that's cash folks, not equity or stock. Cold hard green american dollars). Even if linux destroys microsoft's business (which I'm sure you're inherently worried about.. gasp!), Microsoft could buy up 100 other businesses, write down the inital capital loss and start making bucket loads again.
So please, the sky is _not_ falling, microsoft defenders. Stop pretending like everyone is out to get you. If you use windows, linux users dont hate you. If you like Microsoft Word, linux users aren't going beat down your door. If you feel left out of the linux party, you can join whenever you want, just remember to leave your whining, snivelling, righteous attitudes at the door, because we're all sick of it.
Awwwwww.. Poor microsoft. I'm crying. I really am. They are so deserving of our sympathy and fair treatment. I mean, look at how well they've treated us all in the past 10 years. Dont be fooled folks. Microsoft is doing VERY well without our brain-washed sympathy. Lets not feed into the marketing hype from redmond that says microsoft is embattled and they need our support cause they are down-and-out and they need to be cuddled. Give me a fucking break.
man that really made me laugh out loud.
/. that deal with Microsoft or Linux, and then say all of that again. The majority of users here do nothing but slam microsoft at every opportunity that they get, and yes, insult microsoft users. Sometimes even browsing at a level of 2 isn't enough to keep them out.
Set your comment level to 0 and read any stories on
Wow what a hoot.
If God gave us curiosity
However, I'm running 2.4.12 in Debian Testing, and have not yet seen this problem.
I will, however, be forcing fsck on every boot as soon as I can find out how to set that option.
Bob-
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
enterprise software, by Linux.
I could careless "careless" is a word but you should have used "care less"
Ummm... if you want to be picky about grammar, it's "I couldn't care less".
"I could care less" is a bastardization which means the exact opposite of what people who say it think it does.
The point is to NOT read slashdot at level 0. If you come on slashdot to respond to level 0's, then I'll just roll my eyes at your hypocrisy.
Please, enhance the culture, dont get stuck in the mud and bring it down. And dont be a paraoind MS defender. 1) They dont need your help. and 2) it makes you look like a tool[1].
[1] proper use of tool. Most people use tool to refer to a lamer or some such person. The actual proper use is more literal. A "tool" is a mechanical device used by humans. A "tool" in the l33t sense is a person who acts as a mechanical device for a corperation or overlord, without thinking. For example, if I go into McDonalds and ask for a tall cup of water and the Minimum wage earning dork says "sorry I cant give you water in a large cup. you can have a kiddie cup of water, or buy $1 Evian water", then that person is a tool.
Obviously, I have answered the q. But like everyone else posting to /., i'm interested in others' opinion as well.
"Be thankful you are not my student. You would not get a high grade for such a design
For absolutely needing to upgrade your enterprise-wide linux base in a hurry. Which could happen.
I completely stuffed my first 2 or 3 kernel patches/upgrades/compiles etc, but after a couple of dozen it becomes second nature, and in a stressful (read-Manager/client on your back wanting it done yesterday!!) situation that's what you need.
Plus, it is kind of fun and interesting.
Unless it was Apple. Then it still would destroy hard drives. :-)
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Set your comment level to 0 or less and read any stories on /. on ANY subject and you'll get a bunch of bovine fertelizer. Sometimes even browsing at a level of 2 isn't enough to keep it out.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
This so called history doesn't seem to have noticed that there is/was a version of DOOM for the Apple Macinstosh.
It was a great game. My only exposure to the Mac
was through that game.
Stonewolf