Slashdot Mirror
Linux Kernel 2.5.1 is Out
xise writes: "The next installment in the 2.5 Linux Kernel beta series, 2.5.1 is avaliable at the usual place Linux Kernel Archives. Remember to use the mirrors. You can read the changelog here."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Just compile and install the new kernel, and keep your old one around. Put entries in LILO for both. For example I, running slack, might have an entry for "slack" being the default 2.4.16 which I most frequently use. I might then make and entry for "slacktest," being the most current 2.5.x kernel of the week. I simply direct one entry to vmlinuz (vmlinuz being my 2.4.16 kernel) and one to vmlinuz-2.5.1 (this being my newly compiled test binary).
If you wanna know where to find the FMs, www.linuxdoc.org is a good place to start.
Is this next? Why do submissions like new versions of devel-kernels make it into Slashdot at all? It's not as if most users will download this and deploy it on ANY system.
I also don't see announcements of FreeBSD beta, only RELEASES. And it should stay that way.
A lot of people seem to be complaining that Slashdot doesn't need to announce a development release... I think that its only being announced because its the first release of 2.5. Kind of like saying "hey, its started, just thought you'd crazy ones would like to know!" I very much doubt we are going to see EVERY 2.5.x release on the front page.
And if you are one of those complaining... c'mon... grow up. Like it *really* killed you to read one extra headline.
all bullshit aside, this was one hell of a profound comment. Subject and all.
Does it really hurt you that much to see people's names in the Changelog? Is your connection so slow that you think they are a waste of bandwidth?
I don't have a problem with people sticking their names in the Changelog - they've done this voluntarily and without pay, in their own time, when they could have been doing other stuff, don't you think they deserve just a little recognition? They've done a great job.
And it serves a purpose too as already pointed out - it allows you to see who was responsible for a change, so your type can be quick to blame them if feature X related to their change fails to work/crashes/panics/oopses/whatever
This is mainly because FreeBSD does not assign flashy version numbers to their betas, only to releases. For a current beta, grab the FreeBSD-current distribution, and you're up to date. If you don't know how to do that, then it's not for you anyway.
They don't advertize that, and I think it's a good idea not to do so, because it saves a lot of end users a lot of trouble. There's an extra section in the FreeBSD manual saying that the -current distribution is not "a fast-track to getting pre-release bits because you heard there is some cool new feature in there and you want to be the first on your block to have it", and that sums it up quite well. Better than assigning 5.0.7b1-BETA and waiting for end user complaints to pour in, anyway.
There is absolutely no reason to panic.
Sorry, I have to disagree with you. DO NOT DEPEND ON 2.5.x FOR EVERYDAY USAGE!!! DO NOT DEPEND ON - what? oh, that's already been said? TWICE? Oh well, according to the trend I should be at 5, Insightful any time now for this post.