Slashdot Mirror
Operational Testing of Linux Kernel 2.5.x
G3ckoG33k writes "The Open Source Development's Lab has begun operational testing of the 2.5.x Kernel: "The staff at OSDL has been involved with development and testing of 2.5 since the beginning and we've noticed that it seems to be very stable for a development tree. So good, in fact, that we think it is ready to be tested in a production environment. We have planned and begun execution of a project to test the 2.5 kernel in our data center using our production environment. The project includes lots of testing and lots of escape hatches so we don't run recklessly off the edge. We began with some of the simpler, less critical servers and, as we build confidence, are moving to the more complex servers. Today we have several servers running 2.5 and within a month we'll have most of the data center migrated to 2.5." Can anyone say Dare Devils?"
I've been running the 2.5 kernel on my laptop for a couple of weeks now to get the new cpufreq support. It seems to work really pretty well. Getting pcmcia-cs to build took some work, but I finally got it up and running and the performance of this new kernel is really nice, especially for the desktop.
...and IN SOVIET RUSSIA, beowulf clusters imagine 1, 2, 3 profit!!!! jokes made out of YOU!!!
I've been trying out 2.5 for quite a while now with varying degrees of sucess.
It would be great to hear from more people like OSDL that it's working well.
Unfortunately, unless RH9 comes with module-init-tools, it will still be a pain to try out the 2.5 kernel.
The reason it's not for production use isn't because it is necessarily crash prone... it's because it can break drastically between minor versions as features are added/changed.
I've tried compiling several different 2.5 versions, and yes they're very stable, when run in normal VGA mode... but I prefer the higher res FBdev mode. Unfortunately whenever I boot into a higher res, my screen either scrambles, or totally blacks out...
-------
"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
-- George Orwell
AC posting is broken. If you aren't logged in, try clicking on a link to a story (so for a story where there are 128 of 256 comments, click on the "256" link). The reply buttons for the story and on all posts are gone.
Install the Nvidia drivers, that's sure to break things.
"In case of emergency, break glass. Scream. Bleed to death."
I've been playing with the 2.5 series off and on mainly for the USB Storage support (devices that don't seem to work in 2.4 seem to work fine in 2.5 - at least the two or three that I've tried.) For the longest time, there was always ONE of the features that I really wanted that wouldn't compile or work, either the USB, or Video 4 Linux, or something else...
I came back and tried it again at 2.5.63. That was the first version what compiled and ran everything I used perfectly. .64 and .65 seem to have had a timing glitch that messed up my scheduled recordings (by mencoder via V4L), but that seems to be fixed again in 2.5.66, which has been working beautifully for me so far.
I honestly expect to see "2.6.0preXX" versions start appearing in the relatively near future...
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
There's a reason people don't use 2.5. It's the DEVELOPMENT kernel. You SHOULD NOT be using it for production use. Often things will break. Sometimes it will cause hard disk corruption. It wouldn't be the first time.
Please, fellow slashdotters, don't be tempted to use 2.5 for your important systems. It's good that it's tested more, but if you do use it, please don't bitch and whine about how it destroyed all your data.
I have also been using 2.5 on my desktop. I got it at first to test out the supposed desktop performance improvements, but I haven't really noticed any improvement. What I have noticed is the increase in quality of the sound drivers. The new drivers for my card can suddenly mix 2 channels together in hardware, allowing me to run XMMS or mplayer and still hear my Gaim sounds in the background or visit a Flash site, without running a retarded sound server, or having programs choke and die because they can't open /dev/dsp. If only ALSA would implement a kernel-mode audio mixer so everyone could have as many channels mixed together as they wanted. We could get rid of this rediculous proliferation of bloated, incompatible "media servers" that use complicated IPC schemes to achieve basically the same result less efficiently. Here's hoping.
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
Anyone want to earn some karma by giving a list of what big new features are going to be in the next kernel?
This is however still a DEVELOPMENT kernel. I put that in big letters because it's very, very true. Lots of kernel modules won't compile still. Documentation for what has changed is somewhat spotty, and it took me some time to get everything working decently. And getting a system that can boot into 2.4 or 2.5 seems quite difficult with the new modutils package (or at least I haven't gotten it working yet - have to reinstall modutils RPM if I want to boot into 2.4).
Also there's a major bug with ext3 right now in 2.5.66 - if your computer doesn't shut down cleanly, the journal recovery in 2.5 seems completely broken - I have to reboot into 2.4, let the 2.4 kernel do the journal recover, do a clean shutdown, and THEN boot back into 2.5. Pain in the ass, especially since I've had two hard crashes since I upgraded to 2.5. Also 2.5.66 doesn't compile out of the box with default config. Had to patch one file with a patch from LKML.
So in short, 2.5 may be more stable than usual devel branches, but don't delude yourself about what you are getting into. If you want the latest and greatest in performance for your desktop machine, give it a try. But I wouldn't run even a low uptime-requirement server with it yet.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
These are folks who don't include every driver and feature available. They probably won't be running preempt, which has been at times problematic. You can get a very stable 2.5 series kernel by being prudent.
All in all, my experience at running 2.5 has been positive, and my only problems have really been with features not likely to be used by folks running special purpose servers.
Compared to war, all other forms of human endeavor shrink to insignificance. God, how I love it. - Gen. George Patton
I've been running 2.5.x on both my station at work and at home. For the most part it's been pretty stable.
I've run 1.3, 2.1, 2.3 and now 2.5 kernels as they came out and 2.5.5x and on have been a pleasure. I had a 2.1.x kernel eat my file system, I've had nothing like that so far.
Now the caveat: don't run a 2.5.x kernel unless your willing to lose everything, backup regularly! and most important because I don't think anything bad will happen, be prepared to write bug reports correctly! READ THIS AFTER DOWNLOAD! linux-2.5.x/Documentation/BUG-HUNTING
"think of it as evolution in action"
One of the major things I'd like to try with 2.5 is the new scheduler. I know many distributions have this backported but I'm running a stock kernel and would like to patch it. Is the backport fairly stable for 2.4? And will it add anything to performance?
I tried to switch from 2.4.x to 2.5 on my iBook, "make xconfig" was completely fubar. If it wasn't such a bitch to build, I might not've gotten sidetracked.
2.4's xconfig isn't perfect, but it does a reasonable job of noting prerequisites.
To be fair, I tried this on an Apple iBook, which is not Linus's target box, and I got sidetracked after a few compile attempts.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
I think he's talking about the console frame buffers - shouldn't really make a difference whether you have X or not. in fact I did what you said and I still had the same problems miketang has(with both vesa and rivafb drivers).
The biggest problem I have is when I shut down the computer it hangs at deactivating swap forever.
"we've noticed that it seems to be very stable for a development tree."
And, in other news, Kernel developers worldwide learned that the development tree was too stable and announced sweeping changes to the VM, IDE, and Scheduler modules.
Said one developer, "it's not bleeding edge unless someone is bleeding. It pains me to think that we've actually got this thing stabilized with an odd-number dev version. We normally don't go for that until we go to the even-number release versions, usually at a x.y.5 or x.y.6 release."
Having gone through high cpu/disk load crashes over multiple kernels, I would suggest a good test plan before embarking on any new kernel.
Our most recent experience with 'stable' kernels (specifically drivers in our case) was the default kernel in RH 8. It had some very subtle issues with Intel's GigPHY/MAC chipset that caused crashes only under specific high load every three to four days. Crashes were not repeatable in specific time frames but would eventually happen. I suggest finding a characteristic set of applications/loading of disk/mem/CPU applications and then test out your favorite kernel under all those circumstances. Many programs that run huge FFTs or other number crunching applications are many times too specific to cause failures. We in this example used a program to calculate huge FFTs while doing looping network file transfers to test without issues... nothing beats the real thing!
Also don't think that even 2.4.x series kernels are above this... as I stated earlier even a heavily patched 2.4.18 kernel could be your downfall... so maybe a 2.5.x kernel is okay but beat the crap out of it before putting both feet in.
-Ho
There are those of us who like to mess with our Linux systems but aren't exactly experts and probably never will be. Some of us would really like to dabble a bit with the new 2.5 kernel on our personal systems, but we'd rather not hose our system in the process. Is there anyplace out there where someone periodically puts together a "semi-stable" version of the development kernel, that us dabblers can download and be reasonably sure that it will be free of such things as major filesystem bugs?
Everyone says, don't run the development kernel if you don't know what you're doing, and of course any particular 2.5 kernel grabbed off of kernel.org can be majorly broken, right? So it would be really cool if one of the real kernel developers could put together something inbetween the 2.4 "stable" kernel and the 2.5 "careful!" kernel. There are just so many cool new features in 2.5, like that huge improvement in interactivity that could really make the desktop more usable, but those of us who aren't experts are really leery to just grab the source and start compiling, because who knows what might be broken in any particular development sub-version.
Does anyone make a habit of doing this "semi-stable" thing with the development kernels? Failing that, are cool things like that interactivity improvement being backported to the 2.4 kernel already?
ACtually it is, wuckfit.
In the example I gave above, I had to click on the "128" link. Clicking on the "256" link brings up the error.
Thanks for playing. You give the best blowjobs 3V@R.
vmware.
If it hoses your virtual machine, you are out nothing. If you aren't up for the kernel screwing up your*real* machine and having to reinstall everything, leave it alone.
2.4.xx is perfectly fine. You really aren't missing anything. You'll get it soon enough, without the pain. Besides, anticipation makes you appreciate it more.
You should only use a development kernel in a production environment if you've already tested it extensively and found it to have no problems with your particular load on your particular hardware with the options you're using. Of course, if you're OSDL, you can actually do this sort of testing, but practically everyone else doesn't have the spare hardware and test suites necessary.
I always keep the console REALLY simple (e.g., you could put it up on a monochrome, 25x80 text monitor) so I didn't even think about console frame buffers. I think one of the reasons I ended up pulling down the X source and compiling it was that 4.1 whigged out against 2.5 at some point and I decided I may as well bring X up to current. That would have probably been about when X 4.2 came out so its a while ago. Once I got bit with the "keep current" bug, I went to X 4.3 when it was released.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
Don't sweat it. Many ppl here use MS windows and are plenty use to lots of downtime, crashes, and loss of data.
I've been running 2.5.xx on my home server since xx was >30ish. not really by choice either. 2.4.xx (for all xx) is grossly unstable for my combination of hardware. I got ide irq timeouts which brings the machine crashing down often before it had finished booting. It would run in uniprocessor mode but what's the point of that!!!
I have one problem with hostap (wireless access point drivers) and my sound card sharing an interrupt which causes a crash occasionally, but if i don't load the sounds drivers it never crashes.
My hardware is:
ABIT BP6 mb using onboard ata66 ide
2 x Celeron 400 (SMP kernel)
TV card
sound card
NVidia gfx card
wireless card
network card
Are there any improvements for Linux native games like Quake series, Return to Castle Wolfenstein, etc.?
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
I'm running 2.5.65-mm4 on my home box because i wanted to find out whats all the excitement and nice numbers about the new scheduler. After i got all the modules right, i did some tests ... and was a bit dissapointed. You see, it's not all that faster ... it just feels different. Yes, programs do load somewhat faster, but at the same time doing a ls -l in my home dir was kinda slower that with excellent WOLK patchset for 2.4.18. On the other side, i was completely able to browse my large inbox (~20k mails in maildir) while checking md5 of the latest knoppix iso on the same disk.
... i just can't wait to test the 'fixed up' promise driver and ide tcq code! Right now ide tcq on promise is somewhat borken. If ide tcq shows some numbers, that would be the last argument down for scsi vs. ide in our servers...
I have a lot of expectations of the Alan/Andre team with their ide work
Perhaps I'm not the only one, maybe I'll post this to the kernel developers. I was just afraid of bothering them with some bug that was due to my idiocy.
-------
"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
-- George Orwell
Nah - the whole purpose of ntfs on linux is to share data with windows, especially on a dual boot setup - no production linux server is going to be using ntfs for anything serious.
i always get a QM_Modules : Not implemented when i do a modprobe... anyone has a clue? jsrlepage@hotmail.com
I've been running the 2.5 kernels since about 2.5.30 -- on my primary workstation, no less. In other words, my livelihood is depending on a development kernel.
It works. For me, I've had almost no trouble, save for some difficulties with the radeonfb driver not liking my DFP when it's attached to the DVI. Overall, though, performance is excellent -- though I do keep studious backups in case soemthing "goes wrong."
2.5 is really a solid pice of work. Yes, it had bugs; follow the kernel mailing list, watch what people say, read the patch lists, and skip releases that seem a bit flakey.
All about me
actually, if you're logged in and viewing at -1, you DO still see the reply links. if you're browsing whilst logged out, you don't. this may not be so much of a break as it is an anti-trolling device.
good countermeasures?
how about a slashdot proxy page (easy to do in php) that adds the "reply" links in there for you. also have it filter ads, while you're at it.
regards,
joe_bruin
The idiots are the ones who moan about 2.5 being unstable without ever testing it themselves.
It's not for joe 6-pack yet, leave that to the vendor release of 2.6 - but for those who know what they are doing, the 2.5 kernel is getting to be pretty useful for everyday work, and provides some improvements over the current stable kernel.
I've been running 2.5.66-mm1 for 4 days now, and it's been surprisingly stable on a box that is doing 24x7 service -
I don't think it could hurt - what's the worst that could happen? They ask you to check your kernel config and tell you if you made an "obvious" mistake. I would just make sure this bug is still valid. I haven't tried the frame buffer @ high res since 2.5.58. I'll try again in a day or so just for kicks.
Is there a reason you are trying to get this to work? I like high res consoles too, but usually end up in X with two terms per desktop.
Regardless of whether you use lilo or grub, you can have the option of booting multiple kernels as long as you have room for them in /boot. When you install a new, development kernel, edit the appropriate boot loader configuration file to make sure you can still boot to a stable kernel (e.g., 2.4.X). I have only had a couple of instances where a new development kernel either wouldn't boot or was unstable once it did. I documented the bug, in a couple instances helped test the patch and could always drop back to my stable kernel while things didn't work. Also, once you get a development kernel that seems stable with your rig, that joins the stable production kernel in your boot configuration. If nothing else, putting "milage" on even a less than current development kernel helps since there *could be* a lurking time dependent error (haven't hit one but could happen).
/boot so you don't fill the partition.
So you end up with usually three and sometimes a few more kernels to choose from when you boot:
1) stable production (2.4.X)
2) seems to be stable development
3) current development
When a "current development" kernel seems to be stable, it becomes your new "seems to be stable" dev kernel and you can drop the old "seems to be current" version. Just be sure to weed out old kernels from
Unless your rig is a completely stock retail box, chances are your specific combination of peripherals and software are unique. So there is no guarantee that your specific configuration will be stable with a development kernel. The beauty of it is, that's a question only you can answer.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
Its easy enough to work around CmdrVlad's er um I mean CmdrTaco's little trick by manually crafting your own "reply to" URL.
Funnily enough, the card could be used with an Amiga style tracker.. except that modern trackers do the mixing in software so there's no need.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
Interactive performance - Pretty sharp. I/O background load really doesn't put much of a burden on foreground stuff, but then, 2.4 + preempt patches didn't either. Resizing is weird. Resize slowly, and the effect is like kernel 2.4 (canvas lags behind window frame). Resize fast, and the effect is like OS X, the window frame lags while the canvas catches up. Both kinda suck. CPU background load (MP3 compression) causes the machine to feel like an XP machine -- big 10-15 pauses.
CD drivers - They suck. Certain CDs (Evanescence's Fallen) will cause the CD drive to go into spasms. This doesn't happen under 2.4.
I/O scheduler - Gimpy. Under heavy CPU load (the aformentioned MP3 compression) starting an app that isn't in cache will take tens of seconds.
Compile performance - awesome. I use Gentoo, and I've noticed big improvements.
Power management - Mediocre. APM is alright. ACPI sucks. Causes weird beeping noises when I try to load the "processor" module. It's probably a fault of my Inspiron 8200's fsck'ed DSDT, so I won't bitch, but WinXP has no problem with it.
Stability - Surprisingly good, for development code. A far cry from 2.4, crashes maybe once a week, but much better than the 2.5.20-something releases, which once hosed my entire partition when I burned a bad CD...
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
One of the nice things about Linux (or other free unices out there) is that it is soo easy to try out different kernels. You can try the devel code, if it doesn't work out for you you can easily go back to the last known good.
For the more conservative, just stick with the productized Linux disto's.
I used to keep the console simple too except I've always had problems with this Dell Inspiron 4000 and display corruption when switching back and forth from console to X Windows. Recently I installed Slackware 9.0 and it uses the vesa fb by default (even for X!). I've been using it for a while and no display corruption at all. It works wonderfully and as a side benefit I get a nice big 1024x768 console fulling my LCD instead of some little odd looking 640x480 centered portion.
I'm a convert to the fb world. Of course I had to move X off of that vesa fb to the ati 128 driver but it was a pretty neat installation setup.
"Please pray for all those who will die in this war, both Iraqi and American. Each human life has the same worth."
What about the UK troops the Americans have been so adept at killing in so-called "friendly-fire"? do we pray for them too?
Goatse link above masked by CGI
OK, you read the beginning and the end of the summary. The part in the middle mentions "The project includes lots of testing and lots of escape hatches so we don't run recklessly off the edge." This is good planning--nothing really suprising since most smart companies do the same thing when they go through a major version change (or install a Service Pack in many cases.)
However, your warning should be noted by anyone thinking of doing such a thing without properly assessing the risks and making the necessary preparations. It's a very risky thing to do if you don't have a clear idea how the new kernel and subsequent changes will affect your system.
Damn you for having an 8CPU to test this on.
I would love to be using 2.5.66 for some USB stuff I need but it won't mount root from my DeskStar drive. Strangely it works from an old 2.5G Big foot. What's up with that ?
You've got to stay away from odd numbers, remember all the problems with everybody's 3.0 4.0 7.0 8.0 releases?
Oh no, those were the even numbers.......
The parent uses a redirect from debian.org to an image which I can't really explain, 'cause I really didn't spend long enough looking at to comprehend.
"we think it is ready to be tested in a production environment"
Wow. There are people outside of the bozos in my shop who think it's okay to test in production!
Bah.
Walk in a minefield and one day you'll lose a leg.
I've been testing 2.5 since about .40 and it's great. Excpet for drivers. They still aren't there for me so i haven't sued it much on my main boxes. I have dome other boxes running .47 and it's running great. I can't wait for it to go to 2.6
... fulling my LCD instead of some little odd looking 640x480 centered portion
You do know that is configured in your BIOS, right? A simple setting change will make even the 640x480 full up the whole screen.
computer brained rats learn chessw sid=882
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?ne
Touch your sack, not Iraq!
(Funny even though it makes you pronounce Iraq completely wrong.. it's supposed to be more like Ee-roq, rather than Eye-rack.)
You do know that is configured in your BIOS, right? A simple setting change will make even the 640x480 full up the whole screen. Not all systems support that. For instance, my HP Pavilion laptop doesn't allow it, while my Toshiba Satellite that a had a few months ago did.
The 2.5 series is reasonably stable most of the time. It's certainly a bad idea to download the latest version and run your mission-critical application on it, but it's reasonable to monitor the kernel list and run the best one so far-- the list tells you what experience people have had, often with opinions about what is the most stable version. It's late enough in 2.5 that people who have some problem with 2.4 that 2.5 addresses can start planning to migrate.
No, no, no. It's fine if someone ELSE tests it under production! ;P
-buf
I'm sorry I don't have mod points to give. This isn't off-topic, it's funny.
I boot up the working system, try to install kvirc from the SuSE RPM, mentions need to satisfy dependency and install kvirc-something-or-other, I click yes. Never installs I never get another error.
Go into KDE control panel, click around in the styles section, kde begins locking up. I start closing stuff. kicker is starting to lock up also. I try to run a terminal from quick launch and get an error to the effect of KDE init cannot find .... executable. I log out of kde, and it puts my in a shell. I try to run startx and get startx not found. I run reboot, it boot back into a shell (was configured for autologin). I log in, run startx, no go, log in as root try again, no go. I give up and boot into windows.
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
More importantly this merely expands the 640x480 to 1024x768 resulting in lots of fuzzy stuff. The labs at school run their 15" desktop LCDs at 800x600 instead of native 1024x768 and it looks about as fuzzy. I think they do it for accessability reasons but at least they don't lock down the control panel so it can be set to 1024x768 (with cleartext) if one so desires!
But those fuzzies just weren't worth it. I'd much rather have a *real* 1024x768 console.
Yeah. Obviously, you did something that you knew was not going to work. Kind of like installing a bunch of NT4.0 dlls on an XP box and expecting nothing to go wrong. It is doable, but not really recommended as it will destabilize the system.
Personally, though, I do think that sys admin is one of the major weakness of the distros (if not THE major one). Just as the distros made install easy, they should now work on making admin easy.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The only package I installed was kvirc. For some reason it quoted kvirc as the needed dependency, I didn't look into it, I just ckicked OK because I was reading something.
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
Should we be yelling "April Fools?" :)
sigs are natural, sigs are good, not everybody has one, but everybody should...
Bollocks. 2.5 is more stable than 2.4 now, apart from a shedload of broken drivers. Try actually stressing the 2.4 VM.
In fact on a Dell Inspiron 4000 you can just hit Fn+F7 to change between scaled and regular text modes. But FB is still better :)
800x600 instead of native 1024x768 and it looks about as fuzzy. I think they do it for accessability reasons
I'd expect a better result from using 512x384. But it is not easy getting a computer produce that resolution. I tried on a laptop running RH7.3 without any luck.
I'd much rather have a *real* 1024x768 console.
So would I. And then a nice large 12x24 pixels font so we get 85*32 chars on the screen. Just a few more chars but at a 50% better resolution than we are used to.
Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
right, sorry...was mislead for second or two....;)
I run 2.4.19 with Ingo's O(1)-sched-patch, but I never had any interactiveness-problems while compiling or encoding mp3 or compiling (even with make -j2/3 ... )and browsing or reading mails/... - also my xmms doesn't skip, to be honest, never has in the past year or so. ...) for myself and I don't use GNOME or KDE.
Maybe because I'm running my slow K6-2-500, that doesn't saturate the IDE-disk when encoding mp3.
Maybe because I compiled about anything I use (X, xmms, aterm,
Upgrading from XFree from 3.X to 4.X has been a great leap, too, and I am almost perfectly satisfied with the "performance" in 4.2
Adding memory is always a good remedy, too
Happy April the First.
Feel that power? That's mah MOUSING FINGER
Just use Redhat instead of Mandrake. It's a lot more robust.
Or optionally, don't install packages from other distros (unless you really know what you are doing).
Not true! I had a co-worker once whose older brother's nephew went to school with this kid who was running Windows 98 and it had uptimes of DAYS!
All the same, I hope they release a stable 2.6 soon :-)
Before my Linux days I had ran Win98 SE for 2 years straight without reformatting and no serious problems. It had it's fair share of lockups mostly from gaming. Even then uptime sometimes reached almost a month every once in awhile. But hell, it ran fast and I could laugh at my friends that had to reformat monthly. I think it had a lot to do with the hardware. It's a p3 500 with an Abit BE6. Yes one of those mobo's with the bad capacitors. Either I got a good batch or this thing is going to die any minute. I'll cry when that happens, this machine has been rock solid with anything that I've thrown at it. It's now running Gentoo Linux and will sit next to the TV playing divx files and DVDs.
Understanding is a three-edged sword. -- Kosh Naranek
Damnit! It's just like last time! Try again, I guess.
I agree RH is nice, I was using RH 8.0 with apt-rpm before installing Mandrake. To me it feels the least beta of the major Linux distros.
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
Maybe I should get that tooth fixed.
The point is, if you run a certain version, it will probably be quite stable, and not at all crash prone
but the next version out may be VERY crash prone...
because it's a devlopment kernel.