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)
Does this mean that no more new features will be introduced into the 2.4 series? Or is it only for bug fixes now?
"Not my manner of thinking but the manner of thinking of others has been the source of my unhappiness." - M
Not because "slashdot isn't freshmeat," but becaused judging from the outcry from unsophisticated users who updated to the latest STABLE kernel when they probably should have been sticking with vendor supplied kernels, most slashdotters either already know about the releases, or probably shouldn't.
Any newbie who trys to install 2.5.1 is in for a learning experience (especially if they use SCSI).
I can't help but agree a little. Slashdot is a great arena for hashing out issues related to tech, but what new insights are going to be raised with each new minor version of the Kernel going into Beta. I can see that maybe it is useful to know that the new kernel exists, but those who need that info check the changelogs daily anyways. I don't see how we are supposed to communicate intelligently about 2.5.1 given a changelog and a mirror, is there no real news?
Let's start a revolution: i for one am in favor of not hearing about uneventful kernel updates anymore... i know i can filter out the entire category if i want, but you never know, there might one day be important news about the kernel(grin).
lysergically yours
Please remember that the 2.5.x series is a development series and is NOT meant to be deployed in a stable environment. You are to expect bugs and problems with the 2.5.x series and generally it is not recommended that you install it UNLESS you can program and debug kernel stuff.
You may want to just continue upgrading on the 2.4.x series and wait until 2.6.x is stable.
-
Ever need an online dictionary?
One of the key things for 2.4 if I remeber right was SMP support. Are they going to work on improving SMP support beyond the process level in 2.5? What could one list as the 'key bullet points' for 2.5 if talking to a manager type for futures of the Linux kernal?
As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.
Maybe just a new catigory for Kernel updates, that can be turned off in Preferences like Games or BeOS (Just 2 examples off the top of my head, Nothing more). That way all who don't care can simply turn them off and those who do care can keep them on.
(Score:0, Interesting)
Yea all you have to do is havve a boot disk with induvidual kernels k?
My UID is prime is yours?
I actually found this redhat documentation useful.
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.
What about this, you use /. like I do, I leave everything on in the main section, I read the headline, and if it interests me I'll read the article, if not, I can do this amazing thing, SCROLL DOWN!!!
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.
is there a way to have more than one kernel (e.g. a stable one and a development one) on the same machine and boot to one or the other
/boot, slackware is /). Then edit your lilo.conf file in /etc.
/root/bzImage25 (whatever your new kernel is called)
/dev/hda1 (or whatever you are using)
:)
/usr/doc/Linux-mini-HOWTOs on my system).
Sure is. The kernel sources will untar to different directories based on version (how 'bout that?), so no problem with overwriting your stable ".config".
Anyhoo, after building your new kernel, copy it to the same location as your current kernel, but with a different name. (on Redhat this is
Add a new section that looks like:
image =
root =
label = Linux251 (or whatever)
read-only
Save lilo.conf and run lilo. This will re-install lilo with the new settings. Of course, if you're not using lilo, then cheerfully disregard the above.
On reboot, you should be able to pick from both the old kernel and the new kernel.
As for where the FM is, check out the LILO mini-HOWTO (in
Have fun.
So what new features will we see in 2.5.x? Is there a roadmap somewhere?
> Is it trendy to be a kerneldeveloper? Sorry but I couldn't care less about *WHO* made a change.
;-)
It's probably less for the purpose of claiming credit than assigning blame.
But, if you have a problem with a specific area of the kernel, say a particular sound card driver, it usually helps to at least cc the author/maintainer of that chunk of code directly as well as posting to the list; just raises the probability of your bug report getting the eyes of somebody who can do something useful with it.
25% Funny, 25% Insightful, 25% Informative, 25% Troll
A great many of the drivers are arch-independant. Indeed, the total architecture-dependant portion of the kernel is only 18.5% of the code size as a whole (decompressed, unbuilt; it's far less in a built kernel). Compilating the download process (making folks get both a generic and an arch-specific package) just doesn't seem worth it to me given the paucity of return, particularly considering the complication this would add to the patching process.
Folks, the kernel mirrors are not at mirrors.kernel.org.
The proper site for mirrors of the Linux Kernel is here.
Here's a quick link to those of you looking for US-based mirrors.
-dan
into unix and punk? check out unixpunx.org
Well, if one of them changes broke something, you'd know who to contact and blame.
Well, Linus doesn't make a roadmap; I think he feels it is counter to the Linux development methodology and would be unproductive. What gets put in the 2.5 series depends upon what patches people decide to submit.
That said, I've read that the stuff that Linus WANTS to put into the new kernel include features for NUMA machines and stuff to improve scheduling abilities for embedded systems. Both of those probably mean a higher focus on making things SMP safe, and possibly work on making the kernel more preemtible. One thing Linus has said he will make sure of is that performance on uniprocessors and small SMP's doesn't suffer much as a result of this.
Besides that, we can expect support for more devices, tons of bug-fixes, probably some more journalling filesystems, and all the other stuff that comes with Linux slowly maturing.
Even Slashdot wants to hide some things
I actually like seeing new kernel announcements on here. Same goes for other big pojects like Xfree and Mozilla. I've got better stuff to do than lurk on kernel mailing lists and check mirrors every 5 minutes to see if a new kernel's out. /. is usually the first place I hear about a new kernel release, and usually its posted even before its propagated to the mirrors I'd be checking.
Perhaps there should be a new "version" category for the more pointless new version announcements (although I wouldn't call this one exactly pointless. nothing major is new, but at least we know the new stuffs going here from now on) so people can filter articles like this instead of bitching about it every time
Can't they fix the 2.4.x bug which loves to chew up a ton of pagecache?!? Just cut that thing down...
--
# Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
$Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
I have to support some of those old monsters. Does anyone know what the story is on the seperate driver issue? Considering the amount of effort it took to learn how to configure those boogers, I'm a little bummed that all that effort is going to waste.
political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
Kill Smart Tags:
meta name="MSSmartTagsPreventParsing" content="TRUE"
Is this true?
Comparing it to Windows will be a moot point, since El Dorado is going to have a 40% larger code base than XP.
i agree, i went a bit off the handle there. this is a much better suggestion.
/. is a democracy or anything...
new proposal: a new topic category for versioning.
not like
[grin]
lysergically yours
Can anyone tell me what is happening to Alan Cox's -AC releases? He hasn't posted a new one since 2.4.13-ac8, and I can't find anything saying he's stopped or whatever.
-AndrewJNR, NSO, The Don College
Reading the change logs, and there's lots of "bio" in there. What's that? Basic I/O?
Laugh at stupidity: mod idiots +1 Funny.
Since when did slashdot started announcing the DEVELOPEMENT kernel releases?! Go read LKM if you want this!
Did you read that third word in green at the top left of the page, right under "Slashdot"?
Yes, we're nerds, we care. If you aren't, go read a pop news site.
I just finally got version 2.0.34 to not make my toaster oven radiate green antimatter. I've heard that 2.4.15-pre14 has this feature built in if I remount my disks enough without syncing and doing lots of little changes to my filesystem - I guess it'd be a bit unorthodox to use that method to make my toaster stop, but it should theoretically work. Does the 2.5 series have this problem solved?
I kind of got frustrated after trying to patch it for a while, and just let it eat stuff before I finally made myself fix it, but when I sent in the patch, he said it was too big and obfuscated (I'm not quite sure what he meant - BettyLuJane could read it fine if I held her head on for her), but now I have to try all over again? 2.1 or 2.2 I think I could get done before it starts eating the sofa again, but 2.5? It'd eat all the way through the safety systems on all my Acme stuff, and I don't want that to happen again.
I mean, 2.5 just sounds really big. Does it mean I have to use real names for my variables instead of just my favorite letters? Also, I don't think my toaster liked gcc. It said something about being incompatible with M$ PROPRIETARY ANTIMATTER-GENERATING TOASTER's. I still don't know where that came from, but it all went away when I rewrote the kernel in Visual Basic 2.0+.
Well, thank you for your time. If you have any suggestions (or if you want to send me a new toaster - I can't really afford a new one quite yet), my email is gheiste.strauss@mickeymouse.com.
P.S. If it does fix the antimatter problem, does that mean I don't have to worry about it destroying the city anymore? (these guys in suits wouldn't take me seriously when I told them I couldn't figure out what was going on, and they let me go after a couple of years, but I don't like them anymore - they aren't as polite as they used to be)
Reading down a bit further in the logs, it seems to be "Block I/O". Now I know. :-)
Laugh at stupidity: mod idiots +1 Funny.
I think it should be noted that this is the first 2.5.x release that actually forks away from the 2.4 (2.5.0 was just a 2.4 kernel in disguise) so this is an event... this is the first new tree since 2.3 closed.
In that sense, this is a big deal. Of course, posting all the 2.3.x announcements would be excessive.
----------------- "I have a bone to pick, and a few to break." - Refused -------------------
Home Alone 2 is on TV and after watching all of the terrible accidents that the bad guys go through I now realize why I don't attempt to update Linux myself, especially a development version. I could practically kill myself in the process, and it would be by my doing.
I'm sure your post about how to use lilo to boot an alternate kernel is well intentioned, but please, don't feed the newbies.
I remember doing this exact same thing about 4 years ago with RedHat. The manual was pretty clear on how to do it. The fun thing about Linux was that there was so much you could do, and you could do some really neat stuff (like getting your ISA PNP devices to work! Yay, Soundblaster AWE 64 lives in Linux! Muahahahaa.. Er, sorry. Anyway, the point I am trying to make is that Linux was worthwhile if you bothered to do your homework. The people that are always waiting for a quick fix don't want to learn anything.
I mean, really, okay I guess this means that there are more people just *trying* Linux, which is cool. Its what most of us have been trying to tell our friends and family for years. Some of em are even to the point where they wanna fiddle with the kernel, maybe even compile thier own. Great! And lets face it, alot of us consider ourselves to be some level of Linux guru, so when your friends and family have some Linux-related task, its your job to take care of it, right?
Sorry if this is getting offtopic, but there are a lot of "trendy" folk starting to invade slashdot. They see these posts about the latest kernel, and they figure they gotta have it, even though they don't know why. ("It will be faster! Newer is always better!"). Ugh. Its really kinda like shooting yourself in the foot. While I like to follow the kernel development for mostly just interest's sake, I'm not so foolhardy to install a development-series kernel (though 2.4.x was moving in the right direction, the earlier releases were ugly monstrosities of a 2.2 kernel gone terribly wrong). But I digress..
On a bright note, I have an idea for the linux-distro people... The prefab kernels redhat, mandrake, suse, et al slap on thier CD's are junk! Lets just compile everything in, so it works for everybody! A good idea, but not so hot in practice. You can get a pretty good performance boost by rolling your own kernel, so why not include that as part of the installation process? Give the installer a choice between installing the stock kernel (faster install), or compiling a fresh kernel (slower install, but worth it, I think). The installer programs from RedHat and Mandrake (the only ones I've used recently) are pretty good at detecting hardware, so why not put that capability to good use by auto-configuring the kernel and compiling a custom one for that specific machine? Maybe its just me, but I have seemed to notice that the stock distro kernels are more prone to failure than a custom one. Why is it that a brand-new installation of Mandrake can crash and take down the whole machine?! WTF? Us Linux fans like to think linux is fairly powerful, stable, and customizable. Maybe we should really prove that to ourselves?
What could possibly hurt the security of the American people more than giving our own government the ability to hide its
Yes, there is a point to Google caching a copy of itself -- they don't have to code in a special case for their own site.
Value(Code clarity) >= Value(Memory for one cached page)
-Justin
That's enough posting for now lads, there're trolls afoot.
Ok, this is a development kernel, so you shouldn't just jump in as if it were a stable release. But keep in mind that this is only 2.5.1, where 2.5.0 == 2.4.15, a stable kernel. Since it's only been one revision, it can't have destabilized that much.
A quick primer on kernel engineering might help. You know how the 2.4.x series solidified release by excruciating release? Well, the 2.5.x series is the same, only in reverse. It takes as much work to destabilize a kernel as it did to stabilize it, so don't expect crashes and corruption right away. In fact, just as a few 2.4.x releases were regressions, 2.5.1 might even be stabler than 2.5.0. That would be an accident, though, and the developers try to prevent it.
To the Slashdot editors: You can dispense only so much over-caution before the readers decide you're crying wolf. As a community, we need to save up our restraint for the real hour of need, when the siren song of exotic new features lures even the most stolid administrator from the doldrums of predictable stability, into the roiling churn of highly evolved breakage. I would recommend toning down the warnings for now, and becoming progressively more shrill as the kernel hits its maximal instability.
The evaluation of an action as 'practical' . . . depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.
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.
This is a development kernel. It's not beta. Beta generally means "feature-complete, but not fully tested". It's not alpha, because alpha usually means "mostly complete". Development means "not complete at all".
Our company just started on the next release of our software, so I feel a bit "in tune" with where the kernel developers are at.
The beginning of a new release should be the place where you make all the hard choices and break things. Then you start putting the pieces together, and if you broke the right stuff for the right reasons, it will be better (but probably less stable) than before. Gradually, you add more and more features, but they don't tend to break things as badly. Finally, you stop adding features, and work on polish.
This is a development kernel, and things are broken because smart people decided to break them. Don't think it's beta. It's not.
Was 2.4.x Alpha then?
I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
I'm with you on that 100%. What amazes me is that the people who take time to bitch about new kernel announcements actually expect to be taken seriously...after they spend the time to write a comment about what a waste of time it is to read a simple headline announcing a new kernel.
:)
Yeah whatever. Maybe Slashdot should just start a fund to send all the crybabies some tissue paper to blow their nose when they're done bawling about all the extra bandwidth a kernel summary takes up.
Maybe only the milestone ones...
Well, to be fair, a ton of the kernel will be re-written by 2.5.2. From what I've been reading at LKML, the block IO layer will have been re-done, and then the new kbuild will start to be integrated (Optional on supported platforms at that point). That's actually some pretty big stuff.
--Josh
There are exactly 42,935,718 letter sized sheets in a square mile.
Nahh... I think he's afraid of ignorant hacks jacking up the beauty of a codebase that is the Kernel.
Linux has its place. We use Linux at the college I work at for things like DNS, Web servers, system monitoring tools, and proxy servers. Heck, one of my desktop systems even uses it. Seriously, when it's hard to come by budget money, things like Linux come in handy. After all, it's a lot easier to tell your boss that you setup a server for nothing, than having to tell him you spent like $25,000 on your typical Unix solution. (we've got a Digital/Tru64 UNIX box on campus that cost almost $100,000 new)
/. so much for posting this. It's not like they're forcing you to upgrade, it's just a notice that 2.5.x is out. (not like I'm ready to upgrade yet anyways, I've just upgraded to 2.2.20 on my slackware box)
Now to keep this on topic, I'm surprised that people flame
-Through the server, over the router, off the firewall... Nothing but 'Net!
I seem to remember that slashdot fronted many releases from the 2.1 series...
I think they disabled them in IE6 final due to the possible misuse of the "technology"
kawai
Point taken regarding 2.5 kernels. (I'm not trying these myself). However, the original poster may have only wanted to know how to run multiple 2.4/2.2 kernels.
/. just needs a big warning that goes along with the posting of a new kernel...
In my own case I use 2.2.19 and have played with a number of the 2.4 kernels.
I'm just thinking back to kernel 2.0.0 arriving and wanting to run it on my 1.2.12 box. Granted, setting up lilo was pretty easy, but what's wrong with some help to speed up the procedure? (as long as the learning part still occurs)
In any event, I agree that the stock kernels supplied with most distros are built for compatibility first, performance/stablity second.
I always build a new kernel when setting up a new machine and rarely have problems after that.
How about if after auto-detecting the hardware, the new kernel is rolled in the background so that once the install is finished (all the packages) the new kernel is ready to go. Then setup the defualt lilo to have the "compatibility kernel" and the "what you really need kernel".
At the least, this could compile the kernel for the proper processor (486/P/P2/P3/Athlon, etc.) and dump unneeded support for SCSI, etc. (major functional areas)
To bring Linux to the desktop requires a lead-pipe cinch install process that includes setting up KDE/useful apps/PPP dialup or whatever. It's pretty much a sure bet that Linux won't be pre-installed on PCs anytime in the near future in quantity, so the procedure needs to be:
1) put CD in drive and reboot
2) reboot once install process tells you to.
Of course, maybe
Y'know I'm sure you mean well, but seriously, lighten up.
I actually have been using linux exlusively for about six months and had been dual booting before that. I've taken classes in unix, etc. i.e. I don't consider myself a newbie.
I just figured that I didn't really need to go trudging through the linuxdoc.org pages about it. I've found the community to be a much more usefull source of information than any how-to file, especially considering how outdated the info often is (though probably not on this topic).
I also figured that other people, even the "trendy" newbies, might be interested trying out a new kernel w/o losing their functional setup.
I do agree with your autoconfiguring kernel idea. I think if most users knew what the benefit of a custom kernel was they'd be willing to wait for it to compile.
yeah, i do it whenever i compile a new kernel, in case the new kernel does not work and i have to revert to my last one.
/vmlinuz24 and /vmlinuz25, and options to LILO for each one of them, then run lilo.
just compile each one of them as separate images, like
I noticed mention of an upgrade to NTFS in the changelogs. I realize it can be argued as a non issue, but is there any real effort to stablize NTFS read/write? At work we're locked in to using W2k domain controllers, and have W2k in a few other places as well. Samba bridges the gap through the network, but in some cases directly mounting an NTFS partition would prove extremely useful. Or is this a non issue?
I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it.
You must have an awfully short memory.
Strange you feel compelled to give this advice, since anyone capable of running the 2.5.x series would understand this implicitly... Afterall, no distro with a GUI installer and free penguin squeeze toy will be deploying the 2.5 series... The advice is sound, though.
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello
Linux runs on machines from a wristwatch to an S/390.
2000/XP runs on? Oh, that's right. A PIII through a PIV. Yup. Those microsoft guys make real OS's that run on real hardware.
As for commercial Unices, well, what exactly classifies one as a commercial UNIX? Are you counting unix-type systems that are sold for money, or does the code have to have been licensed from sys V at some point? If it's the former definition, then linux is a commercial UNIX (IIRC it even got unix98 certified).
Btw, did you recommend that people move off of NT when there were the alpha and beta builds of 2000 being circulated around?
Oh well, enough feeding the trolls. Back to studying for real analysis. It would be nice to actually help out on this kernel, too. From what I can gather there are plenty of jobs that are quite doable by non-experts. For example, adapting block drivers to the new interface.
They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. -- C. Sagan
I don't get it, Linux 2.5? I'm using Linux 7.2. But in any case, even if this were a new version, I'd go to freshmeat to check out on these things, not slashdot. (Yes, I know about Freshmeat even though I can't tell the difference between Linux and Redhat). Don't upgrade, anyway, Linux is a bunch of crap. You're better off upgrading to Windows 2005 or MacOS XIV. They even let you keep your uptime even during power outages. And when you do that, always use the mirrors. That way you see any secret messages in mirror-writing on the packaging.
;-)
Oh, did I make first post?
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
Hey, there's one of the reasons why the names are useful, you can attribute the area of code that is probably being changed, if the changelog messasge is a little terse
add another stanza to the poem we call /etc/lilo.conf
It's one of my favorites.
Spring is here. Don't believe me, look outside!
XFS and JFS supposed to be merged into the kernel? I saw a post a while back on Slashdot that claimed Linus wanted IBM/SGI/etc to wait for 2.5. Well 2.5 is here...
So the 64000 Euro question is... when are we getting ACL support? I've heard the IBM solution was good, but required a lot of kernel patches -- but that's what development kernels are all about!
For Pete's sake! Don't read the articles if you aren't interested in them. It's not that difficult. Am I missing something here? All you need to do is NOT click on the 'Read More...' link. You just go 'Oh look, an article about 2.5.1. I won't bother reading that.' Then you move on.
There has been a major scientific break-in
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.
actually:
/extremely/ stable.
/proc interfaces, etc..). Note that the most significant determinant of the stability of the ABI is /not/ the kernel, rather it is libc and libc++. (ie glibc for most linux systems.) If you have the right libraries you can still run 5 year old a.out binaries on linux 2.4.
the Linux API is
the Linux ABI is also very stable. the only thing that isn't guaranteed stable is extremely low-level linux-specific interfaces. (Eg firewalling, routing, network setup,
the internal kernel API is not stable. and linus likes it that way.
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
if only that was a haiku...
/me not get much sleep)
(sorry,
(sorry again, me too much irc did, yes)
My other
linux kernel doesn't affect end-users.
;)
Also, overhauling your engine won't make your driving any better - you just have to get over the illusion that you're in England.
Anyone else, just think about it - program installation on the kernel - you ain't seen 'monolithic' yet
My other
on thier CD's are junk! Lets just compile everything in, so it works for everybody!
It hasn't been like that for years, at least not with SuSE. There's just too many different configurations out there. Now they boot with a rahter minimal kernel and use a ramdisk that has all the modules.
You can get a pretty good performance boost by rolling your own kernel
That's a myth. With the amount of memory available nowadays, a customized kernel gets you very, very little performance improvements.
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
--Henry Kissinger
Have you seen how many bites egg troll gets?
Yup, a shiny new block device layer, supposed to scale better on big boxes. It required significant changes to all block drivers, meaning all the hardware drivers for IDE, SCSI, RAID, floppy, etc.
This is what makes 2.5.1 a "caution, do not try this at home" development kernel. The early kernels in 2.3 were pretty tame by comparison - the big breakage there (the Great Page Cache Migration) didn't happen until I think 2.3.7.
"How can you claim that you are anti-crack, while still writing a window manager?" — Metacity README
Please, restore my faith in humanity by reading it again and at least pretending to laugh if you still don't get it.
The evaluation of an action as 'practical' . . . depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.
BSD kernel development and Linux kernel development seem to be examples of two very different paradigms[1]
FreeBSD[2] kernel development, bug tracking and fixing appear to be very formal, resulting in a rather sedate evolution. Linux versions of the same thing, although every bit as centralised as BSD projects (or even more so, because Linus decides what goes into the release), appears to be much less formal--I can find no Linux equivalent of FreeBSD's bug tracking system.
The FreeBSD project does also appear to have more rigid project management. It's also much more of a single entity, too. Whereas the Linux kernel project is distinct from the distributions that use it, typically a BSD project includes management of everything from kernel development through package management to documentation, promotion and distribution of source media.
[1] Sorry for dumping the p-word on you without warning there, but I think it's merited in this case [G,D&R].
[2] Taking FreeBSD as an example of a BSD project.
251!!! 251-5049!!! CATS!
That is our tribute to g0ff for the day. Thank you, drive through.
Really! I thought 2.4.15 was a 2.5 kernel in disguise!
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
does anyone have a link to what new features are on the wish list for the new development kernel?
They could just deny all access from GoogleBot in their robots.txt file.
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
ide-floppy.o `ide-floppy_end_request'
ide-floppy.c:699: warning: comparison between pointer and integer
ide-floppy.c:699: warning: comparison between pointer and integer
ide-floppy.c: In function `idefloppy_que_pc_head':
ide-floppy.c:779: incompatible types in assignment
ide-floppy.c: In function `idefloppy_create_rw_cmd':
ide-floppy.c:1214: warning: comparison between pointer and integer
etc........
Back to my trusty 2.4.16
Hmmm...let me get this straight.
You're bragging about being stupid.
Wow, I'm really impressed. Ok, you win, you are definately slower at learning OSs then I am.
MEoW