Slashdot Mirror
Linux 2.4.18 Released
Kourino writes: "Marcelo
announced the release of 2.4.18 a couple hours ago after 4 release candidates, but the tree marked 2.4.18 on kernel.org is
missing the -rc4 patch that finally made the kernel releasable. Basically, what's marked as 2.4.18 is really -rc3, and what's marked as -rc4 is what should have become 2.4.18. According to Marcelo on #kernelnewbies, most users won't be affected, but people on SPARC systems should definitely grab 2.4.18-rc4. Your best bet is probably just to get 2.4.17 and patch to 2.4.18-rc4. Seems 2.4 is destined to be an "interesting" release branch ^_^; For the new release, head over to your favorite kernel.org mirror. (Marcelo will set things straight in 2.4.19-pre1.)"
Come on, it's been enterprise-ready for a while, now. Businesses don't need the "latest kernel available", they want the most stable. There are a couple of extremely stable kernels out there...
Reminder: find a new sig
It seems that Sun is now 20 years old. Happy Birthday Sun. So on its birtday it get a nice new Linux patch for its platform. Ok everyone Dig out your old Sparc 2's and install you Linux kernel.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Basically, what's marked as 2.4.18 is really -rc3, and what's marked as -rc4 is what should have become 2.4.18. According to Marcelo on #kernelnewbies, most users won't be affected, but people on SPARC systems should definitely grab 2.4.18-rc4.
Wow. Now that's professionalism, eh? Good thing that this whole Open Source badge makes it all okay.
Would the fifteen second delay to rename a couple files before release really have killed anyone?
--saint
> Load code did not set personality for
> binaries without an interpreter: This was
> breaking static apps on several archs
Okay, but Which architectures does this affect? It might be nice to know.
the tree marked 2.4.18 on kernel.org is missing the -rc4 patch that finally made the kernel releasable. Basically, what's marked as 2.4.18 is really -rc3, and what's marked as -rc4 is what should have become 2.4.18. According to Marcelo on #kernelnewbies, most users won't be affected, but people on SPARC systems should definitely grab 2.4.18-rc4. Your best bet is probably just to get 2.4.17 and patch to 2.4.18-rc4. Seems 2.4 is destined to be an "interesting" release branch ^_^;
I've had enough kernel problems in the past. The degree of uncertainty presented around this latest Kernel doesn't inspire a whole lot of confidence.
Think I'll hold off for a while, thanks.
Wouldn't it have been smarter to create a proper Linux-2.4.18.tar.gz (and bz2), and update the kernel.org and mirror sites, and THEN post to Slashdot and other such places?
This is just going to confuse people!
Unless this kernel patched it - the only way I could get any 2.4.x kernels running on older sun hardware (like in my case sun4m systems) was to enable smp support - even if you only have one cpu. I found that if it wasn't enabled the kernel would hang on startup.
2.4.17 is actually quite stable on my old SS20's - one of which is doing firewall stuff right now on att broadband.
Here's the ChangeLog.
That was quick. (It includes a lot more stuff than just the patch missing from rc4).
Yeah, and we'd like to know which ones!
You've all heard this before, but that way people who aren't particularly interested in minor kernel revisions but are interested in general Linux stories can filter away the linux kernel topic.
Has anybody addressed the amd cache coherency bug? I'm still booting with mem=nopentium. That makes me sad.
jeremy
Hey if Windows can claim to be enterprise ready with the csrss.exe backspace bug present I think Linux can claim to be enterprise ready.
Redhat and Suse provide some damn good kernels. I've had no problems whatsoever. They really stress test those things.
Boy, everyone sure loves to jump on the "2.4.x sucks" bandwagon. Sure, there were some issues in the past, but I would like to know how many people reading slashdot right now are really seeing all of these problems.
90% of you who got burned and will "go back to 2.2.x" were probably being stupid and tried it on a production server and got properly burned.
Test your shit before you deploy, if you're not doing that then you're an idiot.
There are a couple of extremely stable kernels out there...
There sure are. Here's one and here's another.
C-X C-S
I believe the problem is on sparc64 (and not sparc32). It's a trivial patch... just a few lines, so it's easy to have been overlooked.
Anyone using a SPARC/Linux machine that wants the latest and greatest should always turn to the
vger.samba.org sparc/linux kernel cvs tree. It's always got the latest stuff for both 64-bit and 32-bit SPARCs (and networking as well).
That said, 64-bit SPARC machines should run fine with the recent kernels. For the 32-bit SPARC machines, I can only comment on the sun4m and sun4c machine. Currently, the sun4m machines should boot and be ok... the sun4c machines do not.
sun4m machines: ss20, ss10, ss5, ss4, lx, classic, javastations
sun4c machines: ss2, ss1+, ss1, ipx, ipc, slc, elc
On the top right of the page a little box giving the current kernel version and the date/time of the change when you click on it you can get to its message board. That way you guys can get your Kernel Fix and read about your problems and us people who dont update the kernel in the main messages. I like getting news about Linux and Also Major Kernel versions. But all these little ones gets annoying. It seems like if anyone really want to post a story with there name on it they keep two browsers open and one refreshes kernel.org untill a version apears and then they post a message stating that. Say I can make a script to do that. (But I wont)
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
There's a report on linux-kernel that the 2.4.18 tarball is actually ok.
& m=101 467401412021&w=2
Has anyone had an opportunity to check?
Here's a link to the chap saying it's ok:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel
whether the Linux underwear for this version has been released yet.
What is an ideal release frequency for one point in this space, is not at another.
At one point I worked at a DOS extender company (Rational Systems, not related to Rational of California), and we released the software every week. The system was small, the team was small, the customers were very sophisticated, and the value of adding new features was very high. We were praised for being responsive. Three years later, the software was much bigger, the release cycle was down to 2 times a year, and the value of not adding new bugs to the old features was very high. We still got good marks for technical support.
Unlike most commercial software, it's hard to point at revenue streams for Linux that justify the midlife software development expenses like full-time, paid-for, this-isn't-fun-but-it-has-to-get-done release engineering. Although there is a large virtual software team for this OS, I strongly suspect that there is less infrastructural support than you get with old fashioned, iron vendor supported systems like Solaris, HP-UX, et al. TANSTAAFL, folks.
Don't get me wrong, I use Linux daily, my servers run on it, and I depend on a variety of other open source software (particularly Python!). I even buy RedHat/KRUD releases just so that some value flows back into the release process from a happy recipient. But I sometimes feel like holding my breath while installing that next kernel release!
TANSTAAFL -- There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Thanks, RAH, wherever you are!
Why can't they just rename the files?
I mean, these people make operating systems, right?
If you have a Cyrix III 1Ghz and a VIA southbridge controller, you must have the -rc4 .
IT'S CALLED KNOWLEDGE. It's nice to be able to read a quick reply that tells me w/o going to an archive whether or not I am going to use the kernel on the servers. Especially when the following link is omitted from the article.
Kernel 2.4.18 Changlog
"Why is this news? This isn't freshmeat! Why don't you post every time Windows has a tiny update?"
/. seems to be so current that it gets posted long before there even is a fix. Linux bug-type news seems to have to wait until a whole new kernel gets released. I want equality, damnit!
We're already one step ahead of you! If you look around, you'll see most of the comparable windows stories are about bugs, problems and vulnerabilities. Windoes news here on
It's only software!
You could have mentioned some of XP's other problems too. I have a test partition with XP pro on it and have not run into this particular issue yet. I hope I never do. Makes a crash a little more serious.
You forgot:
11 Cutesy posts making predictions about other posts.
--
I Hit the Karma Cap, and All I Got Was This Lousy
Then everyone would bitch and whine, like they did when Linux released a kernel three days after the last.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
You forgot:
:)
At least 3 posts with a list of predictions about what posts will be posted
and:
At least one post replying to the prediction posts correcting the missing prediction of prediction posts.
Oh, and I hear Alan Thicke is dead, or something.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Yep, now I know what kernel I'll be running on Debian Stable in 2005...
Imagine that it's 1983, and I decided that I wanted to filter out everything that wasn't of particular interest to me at that time.
Now, jump ahead to 2002. I would have missed all the great leaps of the past 20 years. I wouldn't even have a clue that I would want a beowulf cluster of Commodore 64's! I might even post a comment like this to Ask Slashdot: "Hello Slashdot, I was in a restaurant the other day and I overheard some people laughing hysterically about something called Amiga. It sounded really fun. Doesn anyone know if I can buy one?" Oh, I would have been just like Rip Van Winkle if I had managed to filter out everything that wasn't of interest to me.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
You could have picked a better example there, because as far as I know, there is no GNU web browser. I guess galeon (which I use, btw) could qualify although it is not an FSF project and the rendering engine is from Mozilla. I would guess that most Linux people use Netscape 4.7x, Mozilla or Konqueror, which are definitely not GNU projects. And of course X11 is certainly not GNU.
I agree with your general point though. Splitting Linux topics into kernel and OS would be a bad idea, mainly because I'm of the opinion that the kernel is the OS. All the other stuff can go in the X section, the GNU section, the KDE section, etc.
"Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it."
--Henry David Thoreau
Say what you want, but looks like true reason for missing SPARC patch is just a revenge on Sun for this .
The only kernel that's ever actually powered down my machine on shutdown or halt is the special 2.4.8 included with my Mandrake distro.
Has anyone else had this problem and actually fixed it??
"This is Zombo Com, and welcome to you who have come to Zombo Com" - www.zombo.com
This is off topic, but actually, I think I'd be using the BSD tools (with the Linux kernel). Yes the FSF deserves credit for their work, but so do many other projects, like KDE, GNOME, BSD, etc.
Please seperate whiny Linux kernel comments... (Score:1)
;)
by festers
Yeah, people who whine suck
I use APM and supply "apm=power-off" as a kernel parameter. Good luck :)
This reminds of those people who complain that there's nothing good on TV but spend 6-8 hours watching it anyway.
Take the Linux kernel updates out of the Linux OS topic? If you do that, then you'd have to rename the Linux OS topic to "GNU-based OS" topic because the only thing that makes Linux Linux is the kernel.
If you don't want to read about "minor" version releases then for god's sake use your scroll bar and read something else. Betteryet, read a book
redhat 7.2 has for 5 different laptops and 3 different pc's this is with kernels ranging from 2.4.7-pre 10 to 2.4.17
be sure that the APM is compiled in, and if you have SMP it will never ever work. you cant do apm and SMP at the same time.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I'm not compiling until this patch is available for 2.4.18. It combines Ingo's O(1) scheduler with RML's preemptible kernel code patch.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
The sun is about five billion years old. ;-)
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
General Setup -> APM BIOS Support -> Use Real Mode APM BIOS Call To Power Off
Works for me (unheard of laptop, 2.4.7)
Author, Shell Scripting : Expert Re
Linux was fantastic when Sun released Solaris 7 - their first 64 bit OS. It meant that you could give a new lease of life to those 'cherished' old SPARCstation 1/2/Classic/LX/10 etc. The reason? Solaris bloat. Solaris has grown up with the Sun hardware range. Versions 7 and 8 have a great deal of code which supports later generation hardware. It's getting pretty difficult to fit it on a 1 gig disk - even a custom install, let alone the 420MB drive which came with my old sparcy2.
The non-pagable kernel memory used to fit, just about, in 32MB with some to spare for buffer cache (well, 2.5.1 did) . Nowadays it just swaps horribly. Why you ask? the old SPARC workstations don't have much of the hardware which new versions of Solaris provide support for (much of it installed even if you don't have the hardware grr.). Solaris has a mature multithreaded kernel, it has amazingly well tuned, truly scalable, kernel synchronisation primitives (check out the book "Solaris Internels" - Mauro, Mc Dougall) it has in-kernel support for Sun's hardware enterprise features; dynamic reconfiguration (the ability to tell Solaris to stop using memory, CPU or IO devices on a certain system board, drain the memory to swap, re-dispatch the active processes to other CPUs, remap the IP addresses to other cards, detach the board, replace, reattach - start using the new hardware - no reboot), hotplug PCI, processor sets, dynamic system domains etc. etc.
Decent Sun boxes (by that I mean anything with more that 4MB L2 cache and SCSI disks - a curse on Ultra 5/10/X1/SunBlade 100s), will run Solaris 8 very well, plus you get a tier one Oracle/Sybase/Java platform, with all of your favourite window managers/web browsers/IRC clients etc. available for download.
Mark my words, once Linux starts making real inroads on the sort of Enterprise server kit (i.e. more than 8 SMP CPUs, and much more than 4gb RAM) that you need for serious financial/HR/government/pharms. type applications , it too will be bloated. You could argue it already is - my 486SX/8MB of RAM gave very good service as a firewall, using ipchains and kernel 2.2. Kernel 2.4 and iptables (and I suppose my new stateful filter) make it rather too slow to survive my next hardware cull. Ah well, out with the old...
# init 5
Connection closed.
Oh...
Take the Linux kernel updates out of the Linux OS topic? If you do that, then you'd have to rename the Linux OS topic to "GNU-based OS" topic because the only thing that makes Linux Linux is the kernel.
Yeah, the kernel. And all the drivers within that kernel that only Linxu supports, like filesytems and packet filters. And the FHS, and the LSB and the standards they entail, like SysV and RPM. And all those the distributions that don't distribute other OSs (everyone except Debian). And all the software ports that are for Linux and not for any other Unix. And the various political issues which surround Linux and not BSD and other OSes.
Yeah, there's no Linux OS or Linxu specific issues. If that were the case, you'd have crazy stuff for each individual Unix OS, like a BSD section or apple.slashdot.org, and we all know that would never happen, right?
Its about signal noise ratio. You don't seem to understand that.
The only kernel that's ever actually powered down my machine on shutdown or halt is the special 2.4.8 included with my Mandrake distro.
Has anyone else had this problem and actually fixed it??
Hasn't ever been a problem for me, using 2.2.19 or 2.4.10 - but then, I'm using a PPC system, so YMMV.
--saint
I tried to reason on an IRC channel where marcelo (and other kernel 'hackers') hang out. I was kiboshed. I tried to convince them that fixing the tarball called 2.4.18.tar.gz would be a good thing to do.
:) everyone would have liked this to be a better release than it was, but ... mistakes happen. and, once published, one must live with them. :)"
Here is some of my reasoning, musings and retorts to those who 'know' more than I do.
"Is there a plan to fix the 2.4.18.tar.gz or will I have to patch it. It is really annoying if this isn't going to be fixed to rc4/final, instead I have to patch 2.4.17 with the RC4 patch. This makes it difficult to use kernel.org as a "library". Pretend in some number of months some Joe Schmoe says 'Gee, 2.4.18 has been out for a while and is considered stable,' downloads it, and misses the RC4 patch."
This was rejected as reasonable. I was told that assuming a release is stable is bad practice, particularly based on how long its been out. My impression was this was the stable branch. I'm sure that, for example, RedHat picked 2.4.7 and 2.4.9 and hacked them for their own distributions for some reason or another. They, like the rest of use, should be ensured that what is fixed in the changelog should be included in a given release. I don't like being shunned for being closer to correct.
"I appreciate the need for a releases in software. The line is drawn, certain things are in, other are out. Its just that what was determined to be final and what is being masqueraded as such are two different things. so, the gatekeeper in this case should be able to rectify the mistake."
From the group came no response. The conversation had turned to more pressing things, such as people bragging about compiling XFS into highly experimental versions of the linux kernel. Proper release procedure is not nearly as important as strutting about having XFS working in a situation where it probably shouldn't.
Here is a reply, which was well stated and polite, but I vehemently disagree with:
"Zeio: You and Marcelo both
So, with this reasoning, if I published a book. For the sake of argument this book is supposed to have 10,000 copies printed. I catch a typo after shipping 1,000. Wow, the rest of the 9,000 people have to eat the typo because once something is released it shouldn't be changed.
I also state this:
"I'm suggesting a viable way of dealing with it[the mis-release], to fix the problem by putting what was supposed to be final in place of the tarball which masquerades itself as a release, or rename it to DONT USE like 2.4.11. I would expect higher standards from the linux maintainer.
Finally, to my dismay, I realize that there is denigration concerning the theory that and open community should be attempting to mold the linux kernel tree into a pillar of perfection. Lines have to be drawn, periodic shortcomings have to be accepted until fixed, but gross errors which are easily fixable should be ignored because 2.4.19 is on the way. I'll lower my expectations of the "stable" 2.4 linux tree for the time being. I'll put 2.4.18 in the same category as 2.4.11 and the "greased turkey" release. Seems this is becoming a norm. I strongly appose nonchalant and half assed attitudes towards maintain something of this importance.
Another joke was made that this only gravely affected SPARC users. This reinforces the wholly incorrect attitude that x86 should come before others. I'd bet that if this 2.4.18 wouldn't boot on x86, they would have re-released it.
Sadly, I had to point out that even Mickey$oft was forced to re-release service pack 6 to 6A. The claim was that 2.4.19pre1 is already out, and that 2.4.19 will likely be out in less time that it took Mickeysoft to put out 6A. These to me are excuses. Inferior ones. I expect more from linux than Microsoft. I expect a group project to put its best foot forward. I'd hate to have to write code for a project where FINAL is a line that is arbitrarily drawn. I know I'm over reacting, but I tend to like testing the latest stable release when they come out, and wouldn't you know it I have a SPARC. Guess I'll wait for 2.4.19, like I had to wait after 2.4.11 (2.4.12 was out soon, albeit with a broken LPT module, but that is when Linus maintained 2.4) and greased turkey. Sorry, I don't like to patch a previous major release, I just don't like doing it, I don't get off on it, I don't want the hassle, even though it is easy and have done it for things like the AIC driver when it was taking them forever to integrate the changes into the stable tree.
Linus, show this kid how to rectify an error and do it quickly.
Legalize the constitution. Think for yourself question authority.
Yeah that's right, I said it. I LIKE having Slashdot announce new kernels. This is where I always hear about new releases. I don't want to check a kernel site every day of the year, I'd rather see it on a site I'm reading anyhow.
Too many people bitching about such pointless dribble; 2.4 sucks, BSD owns Linux, stop posting these kernel releases.(Despite the fact that it's clearly geek news, and being posted on a geek news site) And then we add capability to exclude topics from your slashdot homepage, and people still bitch.
This is a tech news site, Linux kernels are a perfectly viable news item. 2.4 does not suck. If you think it does, move on to something else. Ignore the topics. Stop ripping up people doing a perfectly good job.
I like ice cream.
Difference being that there's enough of the former people to care about it, which is why it keeps coming up. Ranting about how other people dare ask for a choice sucks.
Linux kernels are quite clearly a perfect candidate for posting under a Linux topic.
I disagree, as installing (and perhaps compiling) new kernels as soon as they released is clearly not a part of running a Linux system. Certainly not for its main use, servers. Most tech enthusiasts also prefer the stability of well tested stable kernels and have better things to do than install new kernels every two weeks (which is when Slashdot reports them). Newbies don't know or care how and will stick to distro kernels, thank you very much. Don't get so antsy about offering people a choice. I DON'T REALLT THINK THE CAPS ARE NECESSARY EITHER.
(a) Compiling kernels is a part of running a Linux system, depending on how we chose to run one.
It hasn't been necessary for many users since modutils came into existence. More to the point, grabbing and installing the latest release of Linux kernels, even in the stable tree, isn't recommended for most users apart from tech folk who don't genrally care about stability.
(b) Linux's main use being servers is certainly open for debate, I for one am an avid desktop user.
That's great. Although hard numbers are hard to come by, most statistics show otherwise.
(c) Some of us enjoy participating in the testing and development of new kernels.
Thats great. You should even get your own topic for it!
(d) We're not all newbies, and enthusiasts who have better things to do than install new kernels every two weeks hardly covers all the non-newbies.
No it doesn't, thank god. Thanks for making my point for me. People who care about uptime (which most experiienced users do) don't chase the bleeding edge.
(e) Don't get so antsy about glancing over a posting you don't like.
I'm not antsy. I suggested a choice. I said please. I didn't sarcastically rant. I didn't say your option sucks, or that your idea were stupid, or OVERUSE CAPS. Some else did. Guess who?
(f) Your thoughts on my caps are subjective and irrelevant.
No, they're evidence of you being antsy. Chill out.
Moderators are supposed to rate your comment, the way how you explain opinion, but not your position in the so-called OS War. Unfortunately, they do the opposite quite often. Now you have to be with one of the camps to be heard and understood.
I used to like this site.
If the bloat of the newer Solaris OSs makes your old hardware perform like a beached whale, why not just run Solaris 2.6? Its still maintained and will run packages of its era. So what that the latest Oracle won't run (or run well) on it, or that your old machine won't execute 64 bit code? It wasn't meant to run the latest Oracle monster, and the hardware was never meant to run 64 bit code.
(Granted, running SPARC Linux may be more entertaining, and I still suspect it would run faster than any version of Solaris...)
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
... then you could've mentioned the OS that first brought UNIX to my home - starting on a Zip drive in a Mac LCIII: NetBSD.
I left the BSD world for Linux over a year ago, but I still get tired of seeing the world's most portable OS left out.
For some strange reason this message will probably be followed by trolls that sound a lot like {Net,*}BSD is dying. Ignore them.
Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
Are you sure it is fixed at all? How could this have been fixed in 2.4.18-pre1 when the bug was first discovered when 2.4.18-pre7 was out?
I think I'll keep mem=nopentium until someone can point me to a changelog entry that mentions this directly.
Halt isn't supposed to power down your machine. Try calling 'poweroff' of using halt -p.
Yep... just turn on APM this way:
:)
make menuconfig
General Setup -> Power Management support -> Advanced Power Management BIOS support -> Use real mode APM BIOS call to power off
This should fix it
Below are four links - three are of interest to most people here, one probably is not. Try going through the list and ONLY following the links you like (repeat until you can do it almost every time), have fun!
How did you do? Just keep practicing with this list, and you'll be able to enjoy slashdot to the fullest in no time at all!
sic transit gloria mundi
From the tech experience that I have, a machine that reboots randomly generally has a bad cache. If this is the problem, I'm at a loss to explain why it would show up in kernel 2.4.17. Anyway, it's just an idea.
Oh, and I haven't tried Linux From Scratch, but I use Sorcerer GNU/Linux, and even though I think the spell metaphor is cheesy, my system (475 AMD K6-2, 512MB RAM) is much faster than it is with any of the several binary distos I've tried. I'd be interested to see an in-depth article comparing the "compile everything" distros.
If you can read this, then I forgot to check "Post Anonymously".
I'm not calling you or anyone else stupid. I'm not OVERUSING CAPS.
Yeah, you never did any of those thigns. While we're dreaming, I'd also like a pony.
Its something a lot of people want, its not much work, and you're just complaining about my `whining' and insulting me because you can. I won't bother wasting any more time.
We = you and me, you dolt :)
Compare the contents of Linux.org and Kernel.org or simply watch most Linux users, including the experiences ones, speak to realize there's a lot of people who call that OS Linux (because there's far more people responsible for its success than the FSF, including the BSD folk, XFree86, etc).
Most Open Source advocactes are capitalists, including Eric Raymond. So are most Free Software advocates. Why would you think otherwise?