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
Here's the ChangeLog.
That was quick. (It includes a lot more stuff than just the patch missing from rc4).
The patch in -rc4 causes major problems on all non-x86 platforms. This includes Alpha, SPARC, and PPC, just to name a few.
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
Has anybody addressed the amd cache coherency bug? I'm still booting with mem=nopentium. That makes me sad.
jeremy
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
There is a slashbox available with this information. Granted, it won't be in the top right, but it will be on a logged-in user's home page.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
No. What makes it OK is that the fix is out within 24 hours, that even 2.4.18-rc3 is very usable, and that people who run anything on Linux shouldn't be upgrading to a kernel that has just been released, even in the "stable" series.
Microsoft, just to pick one commercial example, releases a new version of Windows once every few years, and major service packs fairly infrequently. They also invest hundreds of millions of dollars in each release. And, you pay hundreds of dollars for Microsoft's software. That's what makes it not OK when Microsoft breaks a kernel release and users end up being stuck with it for months. And Microsoft releases packages with major flaws constantly, much bigger flaws than a forgotten rc4 patch.
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?
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.
That's not professionalism, it's a complete lack of any plan. Sometimes I suspect Linux doesn't even have a release manager. What? They don't? I knew it!
Open Source means that such bonehead blunders get fixed quickly and efficiently. In the meantime, this is the stable branch of the poster boy for Open Source. This raw egg everywhere certainly demonstrates the openness, but it doesn't do jack to demonstrate any professionalism.
Of course, nothing in life is perfect. But the whole 2.4 branch has been plagued by crap like this from day one. Frankly, Linux is starting to get a reputation, and it's not a pretty one.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
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