Slashdot Mirror
Kernel 2.5.3 Released
cybercyst writes: "You know the drill... Lets go hit those servers!" As usual, see kernel.org for the download or the changelog. Anyone using 2.5 for anything except testing?
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
(1) If you get any link errors when compiling your new kernel which refer to lock_kernel and unlock_kernel. Just add #include to whatever files generate the complaints.
:).
(2) If you have any SCSI drives that were broken because of the Block IO Layer changes, then this kernel most likely fixes them. Apparently, the "various scsi driver fixes" includes the parallel port zip driver (ppa.c) for any who care
w o r l d w i d e w e b e r
Ok ok ok - we all know that kernel.org's got some cashflow problems, so people PLEASE use the mirrors and patches!! To apply the patch, from the older version, CD in, then use patch -p1 kernel-2.5.3.patch (or whatever.) Make sure to make clean first also, just for paranoia. Anyway, have fun.
--joshua
P.S. Not redundant, no one's said this yet.
Yeah, but not the list of sites that kernel.org mirrors themselves as they currently are.
http://kernel.org/mirrors/
If anyone is wondering about the future builds of Linux, here they are.
(This message is long, but hopefully interesting? Please read it!)
An idea for a "variation on the theme" for version numbers occurred to me a
while back, but with 2.4 coming soon, this seems like an opportune time to
suggest it and see if anyone likes it...
The Linux kernel established the current scheme with version 1.0, and it
has been widely copied since. (Was it used before then by anyone else?)
Even numbers in the version number for stable releases and odd numbers for
development releases has worked quite well. This encodes some meaning into
the version number, which makes the status of kernel versions easier to
identify. I'd like to extend this further by adding a digit to development
version numbers representing the current phase of the development cycle.
This is easiest to explain by way of an example proposal:
2.4.xx Current stable release series. (Well, almost current.)
2.5.0.xx Initial integration -- No architectural changes allowed
while the inevitable backlog of pending patches from the
last stabilization effort are integrated and stabilized.
The final 2.5.0.xx release should be re-released as a new
2.4.1 stable release. This series should resemble a
combination of 2.5.8.xx and 2.5.9.xx below, and should be
suitable for non-mission-critical production use. This is
a fork from the stable series that re-merges once before
diverging again for radical development work.
2.5.1.xx EXTREMELY unstable -- Major architectural changes, any new
features and major feature changes allowed as the tree is
thrown wide open for bizarre and wild experimental work,
much of which may be discarded as experimental prototypes
prove that some ideas that sounded good weren't so good.
Suitable only for the extremely brave or foolish. Even
developers may wish to avoid this series unless they're
doing the experimenting. Expect constant crashing.
2.5.2.xx VERY unstable -- Much like 2.5.1.xx series, but experiments
should a little less wild now. Best time to focus on the
major architectural changes that are goals for the 2.6.xx
stable series. Most developers would want to work with
this series, but not depend on it heavily for daily use.
Expect nearly constant crashing.
2.5.3.xx Unstable -- Significant architectural changes, new features
and major feature changes allowed. Most experimental work
should be finished by now; new experimental work should be
developed in a forked tree until suitable for integration
into development tree. Suitable for developers, should be
stable for short periods of time. Expect frequent crashes.
2.5.4.xx Almost stable -- Reasonable architectural changes allowed,
new features and major feature changes allowed. Suitable
for developers only, but "bleeding edge" users may want to
try it out briefly. Expect random crashes, but should be
stable enough to be more-or-less usable.
2.5.5.xx Somewhat stable -- Small architectural changes allowed,
new features and significant feature changes allowed.
Suitable for developers and "bleeding edge" users only.
Expected to crash once or twice per day, but should be
stable for hours at a time.
2.5.6.xx Reasonably stable -- Minor architectural changes allowed,
medium feature changes allowed. Suitable for experimental
servers or the more patient of the average desktop users.
Not suitable for any production use; may crash several
times per week.
2.5.7.xx Mostly stable -- No architectural changes allowed, new
features and small feature changes allowed. Should be
suitable for the average desktop user or for a test server.
Not suitable for most production use; expected to crash
every few weeks or so.
2.5.8.xx Initial release candidates -- No architectural changes, and
only minor feature changes or clean new features allowed.
Bugfixes and carefully selected patches only. Should be
suitable for production use only on non-mission-critical
systems. (This series would be equivalent to "pre" series
in the past preceding a new stable release series.)
2.5.9.xx Final release candidates -- No architectural, new features
or feature changes allowed at all. Bugfixes ONLY; final
tuning before 2.6.xx stable release series. Final release
candidates should be almost suitable for production use on
mission-critical systems, as any stable series release
should be. (This depends on getting 2.5.8.xx used on some
production systems first...)
The 2.5.9.xx series should REPLACE the traditional initial
stable series stabilization efforts. The final release in
this series should be re-released as 2.6.0 and 2.7.0.0 with
no changes but the version number -- if more bugfixes are
needed, it's not time yet. Only when it's time to fork for
a new development series should the stable series be
declared. (This should avoid embarassments like 2.2.0 --
a "stable" release that crashed rather easily...)
2.6.xx Next stable release series.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--Metrollica
Note:
mirrors.kernel.org is NOT the list of mirrors of the kernel, it's the list of mirrors of other sites.
For the kernel, you want www.kernel.org/mirrors/ to find your local mirror of kernel.org (which is usually www.COUNTRYCODE.kernel.org).
--Xandu
But where is XFS? Extended attributes (arbitrary tuples for files) support would be cool. But we need XFS for that since that's the only Linux FS that supports this right now, I think.
"In short: just say NO TO DRUGS, and maybe you won't end up like the Hurd people." --Linus Torvalds
> I've been wanting to get into this Linux thing for a while, but I'm kinda confused. And nervous.
Understandable
>What is a kernal and changelog?
A kernel is computer code that makes your computer start up and lets you do stuff on it. This is all before your operating system. (the part you are most familiar with likely Windows or MacOS)
The Changelog is a developer documentation that says what has changed in this program.
> And how come everyone that uses it seems to hostile to a newbie asking questions?
Because these are the wrong people for newbies to be asking. This would be like asking the Mechanical engeneers how to change sparkplugs in a car. You need to try directing your questions to one of the distributions
http://redhat.com
http://mandrakelinux.com
http://debian.org
http://slackware.org
> Also, how do you run it?
It requires an install from a distribution first. (see answer from above)
>I tried opening it with winzip and that didn't work.
Yes opening it with winzip would work for the kernel source as you would get a bunch of "C" programming files in a nice neat directory. this is like getting the blue prints to a house to open the front door. (again please see the distribution list above)
>Adaware didn't call it (well, I downloaded something called from www.redhat.com but it didn't work) spyware or anything, but I know alot of freeware has spyware on it. Is linux like that?
Most stuff in linux does not have spyware. Although there is no technical reason for it, it is generaly frowned apon and seen as bad.
> Also, is it REALLY free?
Yes
>Or is it one of those things where you will use it for 30 days and then it takes forever to come up when you click on its icon until you pay?
no there is no payment needed to get the software.
I hope this helps.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
No, right now 2.4.x is using aa VM. Aa has actually mentioned that he talk the marcelo about syncing the main kernel with his aa series.
To pick a nit, CML2 is the new config language. The new build system is kubild2.5, developed by Keith Owens.
© ilmari. All rights reserved, all wrongs reversed
mirrors.kernel.org isn't the mirror page. It's a list of other sites mirrored by kernel.org. The correct URL is http://www.kernel.org/mirrors.
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
No, the point is that 2.4.19 should be fixed, but it isn't. Luckly pathes (these exist in the windows world too) exist, to give you this same functionality in the 2.4.18 kernel untill .19 is ready. For example you could have practically patch windows2000 to reach the stability of XP while waiting for XP to come out. Same thing, just not as simple to understand all the time.
(I'm not affiliated with LWN. I just like the service.)
A good pace to find this information is Kernel Traffic. It's like a summary of the mailing list.