Slashdot Mirror
Linux 2.4.22 Stable Kernel Released
An anonymous reader writes "Marcelo Tosatti has officially released another stable 2.4 Linux kernel. 2.4.22 was released early this morning and includes a lengthy list of fixes. It follows the last stable kernel in this tree, 2.4.21, by a little over two months."
That feature is still in development. If you really need it, perhaps you should use Windows 2003 until the 2.6 kernel comes out.
*downloads and sends check to SCO*
I'm curious if anybody has experienced dramatic performance increases running X when switching from 2.4 to the 2.6 testing branch of the kernel.
A musician without the RIAA, is like a fish without a bicycle.
If it ain't broke...
'Running' winders is like running a dirty toilet.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
...and no popcorn...!
WTF is it with this machine I bought that doesn't give me my popcorn when I give it kernels?!
Ah, forget it. I'll go back to closing and opening Windows and see if it's more likely I'll get some fresh air in the house.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
For those of you who use bittorrent, try:
linux-2.4.22.tar.bz2
patch-2.4.22.bz2
Choose yer poison: Prophets or Profits
Linux Trace Trollkit (LTT)
Look out trolls, now we have a way to trace you!
Kai Makisara:
o Change Kai Makisara's email address
I was wondering when someone would get around to this.
Summary of changes from v2.4.22-rc2 to v2.4.22-rc3
@lt;len.brown:intel.com>:
o ACPI update
o ACPI build fix
o linux-acpi-2.4.22.patch
I don't have detailed info on OS design, but probably you'll want to take a look at the OSKit and Exokern websites, as they do go into some depth on design issues.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
WTF is it with this machine I bought that doesn't give me my popcorn when I give it kernels?!
...and my TAB key isn't working either...
Mod me off-topic if you wish, I for one welcome our new off-topic overlords.
We don't need a new kernel for now. The existing kernel has been highly stable in the types of jobs we throw at it. But that's not why it doesn't matter. Our director has finally handed down the "No more Linux installs" message. Here is the message:
As some of you may know. SCO has a lawsuit filed against IBM for breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, etc. The bottom line of this disagreement is that SCO is accusing IBM of including some of SCO's trade secrets (proprietary code) in its Linux kernel and that this source code has also been included in the Linux kernel available off the Internet.
To top all of this off, the US Copyright Office awarded SCO a copyright to System IV Unix last month. SCO, through a series of mergers and acquisitions, acquired the patents, copyrights, etc to System IV Unix that was originally developed by Bell Labs in 1969. About this same time, SCO created a new division whose only purpose in life was to license Linux and Unix to end users.
Because of all of this confusion, I have asked our legal eagles to give me an opinion as to whether or not our recent installation of Linux systems in the (our department name) places (our company name) in any sort of jeopardy. Frankly, I think that SCO is simply struggling for survival as it is in severe financial trouble. I also think that any rights SCO may have think it had at one time has been abrogated since SCO was (until last month) freely distributing Linux on its web site under the GNU General Public License.
But until I receive an opinion from Legal, we will not deploy any more Linux systems.
p.s. We are a 1200 employee telecommunications company, ISP, cable TV, long distance telephone, etc.
Well the last one took over 6 months. Remember that most people won't install and test kernels unless it's "final"
I run Debian, what practical difference will this make if I install it? I use the system for office type tasks.
Thanks
Well, it's happened again. kernel.org just slowed to a crawl.
Remember to use those mirrors, folks!
I wonder if I can tell SCO off because of the kernel panic I am getting with this new release. Btw, I own a SCO License
Hay, don't forget to pay us the small upgrade license fee.
IP law confuses me. I am persuaded slashdot readers who read this sig now legally owe me 699$
I've been running the -mm series of the 2.6.0-testX kernel since they started coming out, and I'd recommend anyone not running a critical system (where stability is of high importance) to try them out. Some of the main improvements easily noticeable are in the scheduling / Disk I/O areas, which makes interactive (desktop) usage much smoother. For instance, problems I've had with the 2.4 series where a system under high disk usage made the desktop jerky, and sometimes slowed down to a crawl, I have yet to see with these new kernels.
... sooner it'll be stable! :)
Sure, I've stumbled upon an occasional bug in the process, and once after upgrading found the kernel unbootable, but with help from the kernel newsgroups, a quick fix could always be found. Besides that, I've found these kernels to be as stable as the 2.4-series..
And, don't forget, the more people running the soon-to-be-stable kernel, reporting bugs as they are found, the
For the first time we have cryptographic API in a stable released version of the Linux kernel. Until recently, cryptographic software could not be exported from the U.S. without a special permission. It took some time to explain to the government that the "bad guys" already have access to strong encryption. We have succeeded. Cryptographers, rejoice!
Maybe the moderator is a subscriber, and saw your post before you submitted it.
ok here is the short:
;)
Linux = good
BSD = good
NT = bad
proprietary Unix = good but expensive
BeOS = bad
Plam = wtf is plam?
here is a comparison:
Linux VS NT = linux wins
bsd vs nt = bsd wins
anything vs NT = anything wins
bsd vs linux = linux wins
proprietary unix vs linux = linux wins but it's a tight race
bsd vs proprietary unix = bsd wins again a tight race won by price and development model
plam vs anything = again wtf is plam?
There are not big core changes in this kernel, so it's believed to be very stable. Also, it includes some security fixes so you should upgrade.
Is it possible you made a mistake installing the new one?
If not, you would be performing a public service (in a small way) by trying to track down the problem and reporting it (e.g. on linux-kernel). This is a stable release, and dropped support for any hardware or configuration is a bug.
Well, you heard wrong. The NT kernel is not good. It's faculty for determining timeslices and aggregating CPU time is convoluted at best. It is all designed to make user level timeslice requests (ie GUI events) occur more quickly. The solution provided by NT kernel is a timeslice lookup matrix with more elements than I can currenly remember to cound (something like 3 levels with 11 sublevels for each).
When compared to the Linux or even Solaris CPU timeslice allocationg, it is horribly overcomplicated and slow and clunky.
Anyone know if the new kernel has been fixed for the C-Media 9738 AC97 Codec? Last time I checked Alan Cox "patched" this in 2.4.21 and my integrated sound didn't work. I know this has gotta be a pretty big problem.. my board was pretty popular (K7S6A)...
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
This short guide walks you through the steps used to compile and install a new 2.4 kernel.
*YAWN* come on /.
Sorry, this is an incomplete list for the 2.6 series, while the kernel released is 2.4.22. For a almost complete list of features going into 2.6 you can see Linux Kernel 2.6 Status
No he is not, he is the boss of the 2.6 releases.
Okay, we've got a new kernel. That's cool. I've built kernels before in the past...in the past.
Now with RH9, every time I try to make a custom kernal it pooches the system mightily. I'll lose video, or I won't get power, or it'll give LOTS of errors when starting up because I didn't have a Makefile just like Redhat's magic one.
So how would a person compile 2.4.22 and still have the same support as whatever RH9 based build they're currently running?
"Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
Da kernel be da damn essential centa' o' some doodad opuh'atin' system, da co'
dat provides basic services 4 all otha' parts o' da damn opuh'atin' system.
Some synonym be nucleus. Some kernel kin be contrasted wit' some shell, da
outermost part o' some opuh'atin' system dat interacts wit' usa' commands.
Kernel an' shell be terms 'esploited mo' frequent-like in Unix an' some kinda'
otha' opuh'atin' systems dan in I-B-fuckin'-M mainframe systems.
Typical-like, some kernel (down low, o' no comparable centa' o' some opuh'atin'
system) includes some interrupt handla' dat handles all requests o' completed
I/O opuh'ashuns dat battle 4 da kernel's services, some schedula' dat
determines which rehabs share da damn kernel's processin' time in whut orda',
an' some supuh'visor dat actual-like gives 'esploit o' da damn doodad t'aich
process when it be scheduled. Some kernel may also include some managa' o' da
damn opuh'atin' system's address spaces in memory o' storage, sharin'
dese-he'ah among all components an' otha' usa's o' da damn kernel's services.
Some kernel's services be requested by otha' parts o' da damn opuh'atin' system
o' by applicashun through some specified set o' rehab interfaces sometimes
known as system calls.
Becuz da code dat makes down da kernel be needed continuous-like, it be
usual-like loaded into doodad storage in some arai dat be protected so's dat it
aint gonna be overlaid wit' otha' less frequent-like 'esploited parts o' da
damn opuh'atin' system.
Da kernel aint t' be confused wit' da damn Basic Input/Output System (down low,
B-I-O-fuckin'-S).
Some kinda' kernels have been developed independent-like 4 'esploit in no
opuh'atin' system dat be hankerin' t'esploit it. Right on! Some well-known
'esample be da damn Mach kernel, developed at Carnegie-Mellon University, an'
current-like 'esploited in some version o' da damn Linux opuh'atin' system 4
Apple's Powermac doodads.
Just saw that 2.6.0-test4 is out. Been using test-3 with a patch akmp patch for the APIC on the nforce2, and have loved the results. X is more responsive, sound is much less likely to skip when the disk is in use. Havent found out if they included that patch in test-4, so if anyone knows, please reply.
"My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett
Is this some evil plot by SCO? Why have we slashdotted kernel.org?? OH THE HUMANITY!!
Here's what you can do to use vanilla kernels in RedHat. It may not be the easiest route, but it works like a charm every time.
1) Enter your regular redhat kernel source directory. Everything should be preconfigured, unless you changed things;
2) make menuconfig, then Save Configuration to Alternate File. Pick a name you'll remember;
3) Exit menuconfig, enter vanilla kernel directory;
4) make menuconfig, Load an Alternate Configuration File. Enter the name of the previous config, with full path.
5) Profit! You might want to check any new options just for fun (such as built-in crypto for this kernel release), but it isn't necessary.
Your new kernel should now run just fine under RedHat, with a minimum of fuss. It'll be a long compile, though, because even the kitchen sink will be included. Still, it's more work for the computer and less work for you.
Someone mod this down ... it is a troll that has been posted before. These are some 2.5.X patches that will be in 2.6, nothing that is in 2.4.22. Read the real changelog that was linked from the article. Moderators ... wake up!
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
I see that nobody bothered to answer your question. Offtopic posts seem to multiplying as fast as spam these days on Slashdot.
8 59-1/boo ks/design-44bsd/
- HO WTO/index.html
BTW, have you heard of Google???
BSD:
http://freebsd.unixtech.be/doc/en_US.ISO8
Linux:
http://www.kernelhacking.org/docs/kernelhacking
http://cs.uml.edu/~cgould/
Linux kernel. 2.4.22 was released early this morning and includes a lengthy list of fixes.
all of which came from SCO's massive Pool of Intellectual Property.
Do you have ESP?
I've thought about upgrading since I normally like to run the latest stuff (plus I'm hoping 2.6 will fix the broken SBP2 driver).
However, trying to get all my settings into this new kernel was not so easy (it was quite painful upgrading to 2.4 also). I'm running on a big laptop so I have a lot of special case hardware that had to be tweeked. Now, I've been a Linux user since the kernel was at 0.97 or so and I remember thinking how complicated all those kernel options were. Jump forward to today and damn, TOO MANY OPTIONS is all I can say. 99% of it I don't care about but I have to go through each one to make sure the kernel will work... agonizing. I wish the kernel could configure itself (a la Microsoft's "detecting and installing hardware").
Combine that with trying to get nVidia drivers that work (yes, yes, there are patches and all kinds of crap I can spend time screwing around with).
And then trying to get VMware to work on the new kernel...
And so on...
Well, let's just say I'm just sticking with 2.4 for now.
The ratio of people to cake is too big
Forgiven.
... 2.6. The general idea is to backport security, stability and driver patches and leave the architectural changes alone.
The changes will need to be dupicated from one series to the other.
A change to the 2.4 series may be submitted to Linus for inclusion in 2.6, and added if he deems it worthy. The process also works the same way in the other direction. For instance, if Linus accepts a patch to the 2.6 series, then the 2.4 maintainer may choose to include a "backported" patch for the 2.4 series. Alan Cox (I believe) has been the 2.2 maintainer for a while now. (Remember the beloved stable 2.2 series?) If he feels a 2.4 series patch is essential he may backport it to 2.2.
The decision to backport is not automatic, since applying all the patches from 2.6 back to 2.4 would yield
-Jon
You show me one average user that can update their kernel.
:) but many see the same problem and that's why Linux will work in corporations fine with correctly trained IT staff but not for the average home users.
Can it pass the mom test? No, then point made.
Kernel updates should be seamless and not break anything that you had compiled for the kernel..
EG Nvidia drivers. I'd love to have my parents use Linux but if every time the updates are needed (although rare) I'd have to either ssh into the box or go there physically. Trust me you cant tell them how to do it over the phone (hard of hearing)
Maybe that's the whole problem. Upgrades in windows have rarely caused problems. But on the other hand a simple update to Redhat 8 on a production server completely broke it requiring a backup to a older version. The system in question was a webserver and some security update rendered RPM unusable and some subset of RPM has to work for apache to work properly so we were screwed.
I think it's time to get the devs of RPM, apt and all other major packaging programs and make them form a standard and stick with it. And whatever standard should work to where 1 package will work for all systems instead of such things like RPM where you have a rpm for every flavor and version of processor and distribution. EG Redhat RPM's and Mandrake RPM's.
As processor speeds and faster subsystems make code compling a short trip instead of the long times it can take for bigger projects maybe source packages that compile on the target system into a correct rpm for that system/distro and installs itself. But for it to be tolerable you're looking at least 6ghz with solid state HD/PCI-X/XDDR-RAM wihtout any bottlenecks.
Anyways I think I'm rambling now
Do you suppose they did anything with the AIC7xxx driver?
o Aic7XXX and Aic79XX drivers
o Aic79XX and Aic7xxx Drivers
o Aic7XXX and Aic79XX Drivers
o Aic7XXX and Aic79xx Drivers
[...]
o Aic7xxx Driver Update
o Aic7xxx Driver Update
o Aic79xx Driver Update
o Aic79xx Driver Update
o Aic7xxx Driver Update
o Aic7xxx and Aic79xx Driver Update
o Aic7xxx and Aic79xx driver Update
o Aic7xxx Driver Update
o Aic7xxx Driver Update
o Aic79xx Driver Update
o Aic7xxx and Aic79xx Driver Update
o Aic7xxx Driver Update
o Aic79xx Driver Update
I for my own after 10 years of open source and Linux am up to search for alternatives. A commercial OS may be better (better documentation, professional development, you can make a few bucks with your work, no pain, stable ABI and API and much more).
Many of the people who are using open source are using it just for those reasons. In real life, APIs and ABIs to commercial software change rapidly because they are driven by marketing and business interests, documentation is costly and written for morons, you can't even look at the source when you are stuck, and you end up paying so much money for the privilege of using it that you won't be making any money on it.
And commercial software has the unpleasant habit of simply disappearing from the market at the most inconvenient times or having its price skyrocket unexpectedly. Remember DEC? They're gone and a lot of their software. Remember NeXT? Absorbed by Apple, and all you can get is the OS X variant; hope you didn't bet on their PC version. Remember Taligent? NeWS? Smalltalk? Microsoft Java? OS/2? Amiga? Gone, gone, gone, gone, gone, and gone.
GNU/GPL, FSF, prayer RMS they all should go to hell they are all paralyzed.
The FSF does something about software they hold the copyright to. For the Linux kernel, the kernel copyright holders need to do something. Give it a few more months--these things take time.
People stealing open source code and embedd it in closed source programs and nothing can be done against it.
Yes, that's kind of annoying, but it isn't a threat to open source software. And sooner or later, those companies tend to get into trouble anyway.