Slashdot Mirror
Call For Linux 2.5 Testers
An anonymous reader writes "Linus has put out a call for testers with the release of 2.5.40. IDE appears to be in working condition, and the only really obvious thing that could be a problem anymore is the lack of any working volume manager... (LVM is b0rk, atm) So unless that's a problem, start your kernel compiles."
if we actually get people testing this, then we won't have to wait serveral versions down the 2.6.x (or is it 3.0.x) road before it is considered stable.
Members of the kernel development community don't seem to agree that the development kernel will function on IDE drives without destroying them...
Maybe instead of bloating the featureset, they should be working on getting the I/O working?
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
However, this time around, many of the new things have been in development outside the kernel for several years, with heavy testing (ALSA being the best example of this). I may give 2.5 a try...
Were you asked to put it into production? Of course there are other problems, thats why its a test kernel. But maybe there is a problem that only shows up on a certain configuration you use, wouldn't it be nice(assuming you have the time) to try it out now, let them know about any problems so that 2.6 is even more stable? Isn't that the whole point of open developement?
Spencer Ogden
Linux distributions vary wildly in their various eclectic incarnations as to how things are supposed to get done. My favorite system I have seen thus far is Gentoo. I like to see source usage encouraged, base system clearly defined, reference design and methods of extension al la ports (or emerge).
An open question, if I have suggestions or problems, is there a place for people who don't have time to live and die by Linux to "drop it in the suggestion box?" I had some problems here and there in the past and have found that people "don't want to hear it." I don't mind being incorrect, but I don't take correction without explanation. I have yet to year why there is a good reason for things that don't compile being checked into 2.4.STABLE - which I also follow.
So as far as beta testing goes for Linux kernel. Do they want beta testers? The attitude on the mailing lists ranges from super helpful (some code maintainers are very good about dealing with breakage) to this "if you cant write a better implementation, FO, I don't want to hear its broke, don't like it don't use it". In any case, how is it exactly us trying to use this kernel going to help the better it if the method of information ingress is unclear? Is there a procedure? Like Mozilla when it faults, you get to send errors in, stuff like that. Is there a memory dump in the kernel yet or is that still a patch (it's a tradition that kernels dump to swap then copy on boot do you can see what the computer was doing if it panics). One thing about Linux - if you compile it, load the crap out of it to test it, if it doesn't panic in the 1st day it seems to never panic - which is good.
Just an FYI for people getting into kernel stuff with RedHat-ish systems:
Getting Linux via bitkeeper.
Also don't forget.
-
- make install doesn't work with grub, so you have to do your thing manually now
- recommended compiler is gcc-2.9.5.3 [for 2.4 and 2.5 now], I always have extra compilers ready to go just in case. Make sure all the tools are the proper version, and that you have a recent ksymoops (if you need to do any messing around looking for problems ), modutils - etc.
If the build fails, find the offending code and remove from selection, or try to hack it if you need it.
Legalize the constitution. Think for yourself question authority.
You can compile the new kernel while you're working..then reboot into the new one..if it goes tits up, boot back into your old one :)
If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
But, it definitely appears stable enough to do some testing without worrying about trashing your system.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
"There is a reason where there are many 2.0.x and 2.2.x servers out there."
He's not asking you to test it on your servers. The new kernel isn't released yet, this is only for people who would like to contribute by testing and reporting any problems that might occur, so that you get your stable kernel.
To get bitkeeper, go to this url. If that doesn't work, the username is 'bitkeeper' and the password is 'get bitkeeper'.
Egad, the kernel source is being maintained with a proprietary, binary-only tool!??! Does this strike anyone else as severely ironic? (Not to mention maybe a bad idea?)
Does anybody know why the need to change the IDE code arose?
Did the IDE specs change, or something about filesystem management in general?
It'd be nice to hear what Linus thinks of it after a few months of use. I remember after a few weeks he hadn't yet settled into the software.
--Giving to trolls for the benefit of us all
I actually grabbed 2.5.39 a few days ago, all
ready to upgrade my home system out and give
it a good play.
After fixing 4 compile-stopper errors (yes, they've been reported on the kernel lists) I gave up.
Sorry, but if the thing hasn't even been tested to see if it
even using obscure device drivers or compile
options.
(This is on PPC btw, one of the major platforms)
I'm happy to run development kernels and report
bugs/issues. But when the risk of having to reinstall from backups gets too high, sorry, that's just too much work.
I accept that some development kernels will be substantially broken while major changes are happening, but those ones aren't the ones that people should be encouraged to test.
- MugginsM
Does the author imply that LVM is broken? If so, why?
If LVM can really do what it claims to do (allow to treat several partitions/disks as one logical volume) than it's really cool. Never had a chance to experiment with it though.
Slashdot community, please notice: I am looking for a girlfriend.
Nave H. Weiss
From this article:
The use of Bitkeeper for the Linux sources has a grave effect on the free software community, because anyone who wants to closely track patches to Linux can only do it by installing that non-free program. There must be dozens or even hundreds of kernel hackers who have done this. Most of them are gradually convincing themselves that it is ok to use non-free software, in order to avoid a sense of cognitive dissonance about the presence of Bitkeeper on their machines. What can be done about this?
One solution is to set up another repository for the Linux sources, using CVS or another free version control system, and arranging to load new versions into it automatically. This could use Bitkeeper to access the latest revisions, then install the new revisions into CVS. That update process could run automatically and frequently.
You suck, E R I C.
You gave the instructions to fetch the latest version of the 2.5 tree. To test this release the right command is:
bk clone -rv2.5.40 bk://linux.bkbits.net/linux-2.5 linux-2.5.40
That said you should only do the clone if you don't already have a bitkeeper tree somewhere. Doing local clone and a pull is MUCH faster.
-Wayne
Not true. Read lkml. There have been some problems in the IDE code that have borked partitions.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
No, the AC said that there was only one problem left. I understand what ?.odd.* releases are for. The person who wrote the blurb does not. The person who wrote the blurb is implying that 2.5.* is much safer than what it really is.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
It's comments like, "there's no working volume manager at the moment," that scare the hell out of me.
I run Linux for my back-end fileservers at work, and am in the middle of adding more. Right now I just use one partition per disk, and so I end up with a bunch of partitions.
I would dearly love to use some kind of striping RAID, or at least a concatenation. But when the LVM-type code keeps getting rewritten between every release, it's just too risky. I look with longing at my Sun boxes, where DiskSuite has been doing Jus' Fine[tm] for the past several years, and continues to be supported.
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
Oops..ok then...I guess I need to read the mailing list more....
If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
Yeah, in previous versions.
Maybe instead of bloating the featureset, they should be working on getting the I/O working?
Well, they have. It's been an interesting period. First, Andre Hedrick stopped being the 2.5 IDE maintainer. (There were apparently "interface concerns" with him an Linus, but I haven't seen this so sorry if I'm wrong ^^; ) Martin Dalecki sent in over 100 "clean-up" IDE patches, most of which got merged at the time. Unfortunately, a lot of people didn't like the way they were going and eventually he kind of got chased off. By this time it's July or so. Since then the situation has been a general throwing up of hands followed by forward-porting the improvements made in the -ac tree by Andre Hedrick. There are also other issues, like the fact that ATA (protocol) tends to be ugly and have odd (mis)implementations in hardware. Consequently, people who *really* grok IDE are at a premium.
Hey, there have been other issues to take care of in 2.5 as well, so I don't find this particularly surprising.
In any case, there's no real point in complaining about "feature bloat". That's what make menuconfig is for ;)
I figured most of the moderators haven't. kt.zork.net is my first stop Monday morning. IDE is just now starting to get to the point where it isn't really screwing things up left and right. Of course, that could have been 5-10 releases ago given the frequency of 2.5 releases.
I fully believe that testing experimental kernels is one way for people to give back. But I think the blurb in this writeup was a bit misleading.
(It would also help if there were a HOWTO on how regular, non-coding doofuses like myself could learn how to send in bug reports and to whom.)
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
if make menuconfig bombs out when you try to configure it with make menuconfig, do this with the following file: patch -p1 alsapatch.txt
the first line is --- lin... and the last line is the 2nd --
--- linux-2.5.40/sound/Config.in Tue Oct 1 04:06:30 2002
+++ linux-2.5/sound/Config.in Wed Oct 2 07:27:04 2002
@@ -31,10 +31,7 @@
if [ "$CONFIG_SND" != "n" -a "$CONFIG_ARM" = "y" ]; then
source sound/arm/Config.in
fi
-if [ "$CONFIG_SND" != "n" -a "$CONFIG_SPARC32" = "y" ]; then
- source sound/sparc/Config.in
-fi
-if [ "$CONFIG_SND" != "n" -a "$CONFIG_SPARC64" = "y" ]; then
+if [ "$CONFIG_SND" != "n" -a "$CONFIG_SPARC32" = "y" ] || [ "$CONFIG_SND" != "n" -a "$CONFIG_SPARC64" = "y" ];then
source sound/sparc/Config.in
fi
--
--
fair.org counterpunch.com truthout.com indymedia.org salon.com
eff.org guerrilla.net debian.org gentoo.org
Whats the oldest compiler I can compile 2.5.40 on?
"With Microsoft, you get Windows. With Linux, you get the full house" - unknown
A nice way to dip your toes in the 2.5 kernel pool without risking your main system is with User-mode Linux.
Only three problems to mention: (1) "Advanced Linux Sound Architecture" menuconfig option crashes 'make menuconfig'. (2) Netfilter's 'Owner Match' does not compile as a module. (3) Possible problem after reboot with 'modprobe char-major-10-135'. This was all done on a Redhat 7.2 system w/ Create Live! card, 3Com 3c905b card, P3 850 Mhz w/ 256 MB RAM, and a 40 GB ATA5 HDD. The system seemed to speed up a good deal after rebooting into 2.5.40. These errors have been reported to linux-kernel@vger, so hopefully they'll be looked at soon. It seems 'make menuconfig' has changed in architecture slightly...it's a little bit more logical, and the help sections have been worked out well. I think all in all the Linux kernel should be bumped up to 3.0 just because of all the memory management upgrades and preemptiveness. I know 2.0 came about with ELF, but this is the next big step, IMHO.