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.
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
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?
I/O? Are you seriously complaining that the IO thruput is lacking? I'm guessing you're talking about the interactive feel.
So and so, but I bet you don't even run 2.5.X. Granted the 2.4 imho is still interactively crap. It's been ever since the vm "improvement" starting with 2.4.10-preX and how last fall those fscking db-benchmarkers showed up on lkml. I bet they got their 1% improvements for their db and on the same they bollocksed my developement desktop usability to a level it felt like win95. Atleast I learned a lot more about the vm and scheduling internals and loads of neat tricks how to improve latency (e.g. more memory and no, Hz up, neg-nicing X, nicing back ground stuff, A.Morton's low latency and lock breaking patches.)
BUT I must say that the 2.5 is a step forward from 2.4 also in this manner. I've been running 2.5s all along and these late 2.5.30s, especially 2.5.39, have been goodish. Not the kind of interactivity as there should be, still.
Although I'm still seriously pissed off how all the main developers seemed to disregard all the cries about interactivity last fall and winter on lkml. There SHOULD be a proc or even a compile time possibility to tweak it into serverish/db or desktop usage. On a desktop developement you couldn't care less if your compile or what ever the fsck you're doing on the back ground takes 5% longer, but if what ever you're actually interacting with lags like hell, it annoys the living crap out of you. I mean, if I press the button while I'm compiling, obviously that button press is more important ffs.
1 Earth is warming, 2 It's us, 3 it's royally bad, 4 we need to take action NOW
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