Slashdot Mirror
Linus says 2.6 kernel will be out by June 2003
Xpilot writes "C|Net reports that Linus Torvalds predicts 2.6 will be out by June next year during a talk on his Geek Cruise. Linus called the next release '2.6', but knowing him that may be just a working title;)"
Update: 10/26 17:29 GMT by T : An anonymous reader adds "Rob Landley has published the latest list of features being considered for inclusion" in the new kernel; ... "the long and impressive list is available in more or less human readable form on Linux and Main."
Or did he just have one too many Margaritas on the Cruise :)
Rapid Nirvana
This will be March, 2004 in "Linux Years."
"May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"
...that Linus was going to call it linux-3.0. Can somebody please stick with an official version number?
If they continue like that, we'll soon have 2.5.100 ... chicks dig fancy kernel numbers.
Life sucks.
Unless, of course, Linus decides that there must be a set time between when the features are frozen and when the firse betas hit the servers.
I'm getting fairly excited about this, even though I don't plan on using any of these new features. Does that mean I read /. too much? ;)
Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
How about "Linux XP" -- eXtended Procrastination
For most users, Linux is around 8.0 anyway :-) Don't ask'em the difference between linux and the packaging around it a.k.a distribution..
have you been defaced today?
Give a hand, not a hand-out.
I do find it curious that every time CNET posts an article about GNU/Linux that they make sure to include how Torvalds flames or doesn't support some massive product line. I'm guessing they just don't want to make him come across with the public very well.
What ever happened to the saying "When it's ready"? Or is that just a Redhat/Debian specific philos.?
------
Random, useless fact: I type in startx entirely with my left hand.
I have been hearing a feature freeze for early November. Can it really take 7-8 months to go from feature freeze to a final version? Or is Linus actually planning to make 2.6.0 what 2.X.18+ quality?
Havoc Penington, the bane of my Linux desktop.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Btw, what would be the killer new stuff in the current devel kernel granting it a major version number upgrade to 3.0 instead of the regular minor to 2.6? They must have a good reason to do so, me thinks.
have you been defaced today?
The cruise docked in Jamaica and everybody had a ball.
:).
We were told that just a few of the speakers would be presenting in Jamaica so 3 of us drove down to the pier to colect them.
Ha.
we neaded all 3 cars plus 2 busses to haul them to "the Ruins". We sat ESR and Linux on a panel with 4 other senior geaks and asked them some lame questions for an hour or so.
All the baby Linuses were there and Tove is realy cool. everybody seams to think the Coffee here is great (exact words: "The best I have ever tasted") so we will try to have a few bags ready for the next deligation.
PS: No the Geak Cruise dosn't normaly hold talks on land for the locals. However JaLUG asked nicely
Kevin Forge.
Jamaica Linux Users Group. JaLUG
Founding member.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
He never said that.
Nowhere in the article did he even imply anything like the last part of this quote (it's an all-new instruction set that the Transmeta Crusoe processors can't emulate). If you wanted to make a point you should have put this statement outside of the quote.
I can't understand why the parent was modded up.
-- kryps
something to the effect of "Now you can hold your breath until 2.6 is released"?
Because IA-64 requires a lot of work to support for mediocre results on an atrociously expensive platform that appears to be on a glide path to catastrophic failure. Those efforts could be more productively spent elsewhere.
Meanwhile, x86-64 is much simpler to support, the platform will be cost competitive with current top-of-the-line x86 systems, and you don't have to recompile all your programs if you don't want to. 4-way and 8-way multiprocessor systems ought to be semi-affordable too. In short, it's a far better philosophical and practical fit.
No.. this is just the kernel... and it is called linux
\m/
" I don't play RPGs, I have a JOB. I don't watch anime, I have a LIFE."
/. tells me otherwise.
The fact that you've posted 24 comments in the last 3 days on
Anyway, for the record, I play RPGs, I don't have a job, I watch lots of anime. According to you I "have no life". Why is it that I am blissfully happy then ?
graspee
In this interview with Robert Love in July, he predicted 18 months before 2.6 gets released(that would make the release early in 2004).
:) Now that's a first.
I'm more inclined to go with Robert Love's estimate considering 2.4's late release.
Offtopic : Hey, my story submission got accepted!
"Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
Events that shape history need to be presented as history. If we continue to live out the horrors of our generation each day, nothing will get done. If a nerd somewhere sat on his ass playing video games before these attacks, then playing video games again _is_ getting on with life.
If you want to help: survive; don't whine. So go away you... you... poo-poo head! :-
I think it is time for a fork. DTLinux and SVLinux. DT for the desktop, SV for servers. I mean really, does Oscar Office Worker really need to hot swap processors? Come ON!.
This is getting way out of hand, and resources that could be foucssed on the battle for the destkop (BFD (haha)) are being wasted on some sort of kernal probe thing that sounds painfull.
Seriously, don't you think this kernel feature thing needs to stop!.
-- ac ah home
That's the best one-sentence indictment of the Inanium I've seen to date.
Intel's plan was to come up with a new, different architecture that no one could clone because Intel had patents on key parts. They did. But it wasn't a better, new, different architecture. It was worse. So it seems headed for the Intel niche processor department, along with the i860 and i960, both of which are quite reasonable RISC machines that nobody cared about.
AMD's 64-bit architecture is straightforward. It's IA-32 expanded to 64 bits, with a few more registers and some of the little-used stuff removed. That's not hard to support. With Linux support, that's likely to be the mainstream machine for cost-effective server farms for the next five years or so. Assuming AMD ships the thing soon.
To prevent this dreaded war upon version numbers, a good formula would be something like:
V=1-1/X
As your revisions increment, you will be closer to the famed 1.0 release, but never quite there. The press can always ask, "ARE WE THERE YET?" and always be told, "IN A FEW MINUTES!"
By far, it is not a desktop replacement, but when that isn't how you try and use it you are fine. Their cpu was not built to be a killer-super-fast-cpu (and it isn't). I bet if I sit you down on a computer powered by an 800mhz transmeta and a p4 2ghz, you won't even be able to tell the difference with "normal*" tasks.
It all comes down to how one plans on using the technology. Just because _you_ think it is unacceptably slow does not mean others think the same thing. I used to upgrade my PC all the time because it just wasn't fast enough. I stopped doing that around the 1ghz mark because now it is fast enough. To throw a good quote in here... "A blur is just a blur." (this quote was back when doing a 'dir' in dos scrolled by in a blur on a 486sx-33, and it looked the same on a pentium-233.)
*Normal being just checking mail, AIM (or your IM client of choice), Web browsing, Generic stuff like that. Of course this assumes that everything else is the same (HD speed, ram size etc).
bah, I'll just submit this now
That list is just the list of features that are not yet merged and thus need an imminent decision before the feature freeze next Thursday. It's also not especially long or impressive, since these are minor features and a much greater number of patches of that kind are already in. Of the stuff on that list, probably only IPSEC and one of the LVM replacements (needed since LVM1 has been removed) will impact most users, though the crash dumps would also be nice.
The significant changes in 2.6 will be the new block layer and attendant performance/scalability improvements, the new NPTL thread support, ALSA, and the XFS and JFS merges. See Guillaume Boissiere's list for more.
http://saveie6.com/
Nope. In this lkml thread, Linus says:
The next version of the heart of the Linux operating system is expected by June, project founder and leader Linus Torvalds predicted on Thursday.
RMS is blowing steam out his ears. Heart of the Linux OS?! AHHHHHHHHHH!!
"It's OK, Richard, just have a seat and breeeeathe it out. Let it out. That's right... Gooood."
Look out honey, 'cause I'm using technology; Ain't got time to make no apology
A must for embedded systems.
Makes Linux dramatically more useful (without funky patching) for (again) embedded systems, especially given the coldfire 683xx support.
What can I say about this? Another must for embedded systems, and really nice for an enterprise-wide context.
Need I tell you why this is handy?
I'll settle for just the above features but the LVM patches seem like they'd be insanely handy, the console rewrite seems like a very good idea, and the non-high-resolution POSIX timers are a good idea, too. Anything POSIX should be a priority since (hopefully) it makes code more willing to compile on more platforms. Provided people actually use the calls correctly.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Anyway, for the record, I play RPGs, I don't have a job, I watch lots of anime. According to you I "have no life". Why is it that I am blissfully happy then ?
Drugs do that to you.
but what is Alan Cox up to these days?
Have to say, Linux kernel releases have never really lived up to their word... I seem to remember Linus talking about "release often, release early", but that actually turned into a pile of crap.... we waiting eons for 2.4...
My advice: "Don't hold you breath for 2.6!!!!"
Though I'm not one to usually nitpick, man these 3.1/3.11 jokes are old and unfunny. Every time a goddamn program hits version 3 I get a shudder knowing that I'll soon be flooded by these witty remarks. Argh, pretty soon Glibc will be there too. *shudder*. Best reason I can think of for Linux to remain at 2.6.
Jeremy
It isn't that there's a "fear of ...rollover". It's that open source types that aren't marketing their code have the luxury of making the version numbers actually mean something. Apps can change major version numbers when the file format changes. Libraries when compatibility-breaking ABI changes take place.
If you have a marketing department, *they* want to jack the major version numbers constantly so that it looks like one "must" upgrade, or because it makes the changes look better.
Frankly, I'd prefer 2.6 over 3.0. The kernel's performance has been improved, but there's been no rearchitecting. I consider it a bit of a mark of pride.
Also, people complaining in many of these posts about the number of devel releases before a stable -- be sure that you aren't the *same* people complaining about lack of QA on the stable branch, as this is what it's intended to fix.
May we never see th
Look, there's a lot of good arguments to *not* release on a more frequent cycle.
First, stable releases suck for a lot of developers. A lot of people do this in their spare time, and all of a sudden they have a bunch of deadlines.
Second, feature freezes reduce devel speed, since a lot of developers (who *could* be doing work) have to cool their heels and wait for everyone to stablilize their code.
Third, there's context switching time. It's a lot of work to release a new stable kernel, and you have to put out this big chunk of work, pretty everything up...and that's time that could be more productively spend working on features to go into the next release.
What specific features in the new kernel do you need? Tens of thousands of threads? Linus *still* says it's a dumb idea to have more threads than processors, so unless you have a machine with 10K processors, it's not a big deal. Sure, it makes for sexy benchmarks, but they're pointless for real world apps.
Latency? This is nice, but it's mostly helpful for hard realtime systems. From a user standpoint, the time latency is an issue (assuming you're doing the HZ-redefine, etc stuff that you can do with 2.4) pretty much exclusively when the disk is saturated with requests and part of an app needs to be swapped in or a file read.
ALSA? I already use it, as do quite a few distros. I know that at least SuSE uses it out of box, and it's pretty easy to build.
Most of the changes seem to be pretty small (though cute). New driver work, input changes, the ability to use the PC speaker as a microphone...
May we never see th
Or Daylight Savings time, as observed by most operating systems: ... ... ... ...
1:00 = 1 hour till you switch your clock.
1:50 = 10 minutes till you switch the clock.
1:55 = 5 minutes till you switch your clock.
1:00 = 1 hour till you switch your clock.
1:50 = 10 minutes till you switch the clock.
1:55 = 5 minutes till you switch your clock.
1:50 = 10 minutes till you switch the clock.
1:55 = 5 minutes till you switch your clock.
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
couldn't have put it better myself.
Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?