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."

42 of 342 comments (clear)

  1. NO. NOT UNTIL 2.6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    That feature is still in development. If you really need it, perhaps you should use Windows 2003 until the 2.6 kernel comes out.

  2. ready to go.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    *downloads and sends check to SCO*

    1. Re:ready to go.. by IbmSockPuppet · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, the number are meaningless. We're working on a plan to renumber the entire kernel back to 1.X.Y since SCO said that the problems showed up after 2.2 . Stay tuned! And don't forget to check your paypal accounts for your compensation for coordinating the SCO attack. Many thanks to all!

      --


      Cmon. Admit it. You thought about doing this but decided to be mature. I can't believe I got this name.
  3. 2.4 VS 2.6 Performance by Hornsby · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:2.4 VS 2.6 Performance by daserver · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've been running the 2.6 test for a while and the latest O1int patches from con have really made this a pleasure for desktop users. 2.6-test3-mm2 had massive skips when playing xmms and untaring, like 2.4 also has on my machine. But 2.6-test4-mm1 completely fixed this. I have not had a skip yet. Please not that this is from normal usage.

    2. Re:2.4 VS 2.6 Performance by Gherald · · Score: 3, Funny

      I have a friend who's mouse ended up moving across the screen almost 10 times faster than usual with 2.6-test2.

      We joked about the 1000% increase in performance.

    3. Re:2.4 VS 2.6 Performance by 955301 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Absolutely! I'm not sure how to qualify it other than to say that X comes up more aggressively, it's more responsive to user input, and I haven't had any nasty spills with test3 so far.

      It's probably not the smartest thing I've done running on a test kernel for my work notebook, but the added functionality including support for all of the hardware on a Sager 4760 (save the build in vid camera) makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.

      It's just a shame that the Cisco VPN client isn't out for 2.6 (that I'm aware of - please correct me if I'm wrong). Otherwise I would be all set.

      --
      You are checking your backups, aren't you?
    4. Re:2.4 VS 2.6 Performance by hal9000 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Check out this great writeup by Con Kolivas on the subject. We've got a lot of really great minds looking to improve interactivity in the kernel. Great stuff, and no doubt more to come.

      --
      Look out honey, 'cause I'm using technology; Ain't got time to make no apology
  4. Re:Bug fixes sound good, but... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 3, Funny
    have they fixed the fact is isn't Windows?

    If it ain't broke...

    'Running' winders is like running a dirty toilet.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  5. So Many Kernels by Spencerian · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...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.
    1. Re:So Many Kernels by quasi_steller · · Score: 3, Funny

      Maybe your processor isn't getting hot enough. If your processor isn't getting hot enough then the kernels won't pop into popcorn. Try buying an Athalon or Pentium 4 processor. They get quite hot.

      --
      ...interesting if true.
  6. torrents available by gordlea · · Score: 5, Informative

    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

  7. Most important fix. by bfl · · Score: 5, Funny

    Kai Makisara:
    o Change Kai Makisara's email address
    I was wondering when someone would get around to this.

  8. Are we ever going to get hibernate? by Malc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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

    1. Re:Are we ever going to get hibernate? by gosand · · Score: 5, Insightful
      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

      What, you can't tell from these extremely descriptive release notes?


      Unfortunately, for most of the world, releasing a new kernel doesn't mean much until a distro releases it in a release. Why? Well, there is no way to tell what the hell is in a new kernel. OK, you could search the LKML, or wait for someone else to do some legwork and post the results of it. I've said it before, and I'll say it again - whoever releases the kernel should take a few minutes and do a quick writeup of what is new in the kernel. Not "fixed bug in foo.c" but something a bit more descriptive. Is it so hard? I am not being an ingrate, but I don't get why the maintainers don't do this. Yeah, you could go with the "they're engineers, not doc people!" but who better to describe what is fixed than the people who fixed it? Are you telling me that these people are incapable of describing in a sentence or two what their fix does?


      No big deal I guess, and I am sure I'll get modded down for not drooling over a new kernel. But I'll bet 90% of the people who rave about it don't know what they are compiling.

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    2. Re:Are we ever going to get hibernate? by zenyu · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The problem from what I understand is there are so many iterations of it that the devs simply can't get the kernel to work with all of them. I can't fault them for that, but ACPI is as common as TCPIP now and this is one area where Linux has fallen way behind the curve. Having only some hardware work and only certain functions available just isn't good enough.

      As somebody who wrote an early user space cpu frequency scaling deamon, I think it's not just all the broken ACPI tables but also the fact that the intel engineers change the interface at ever minor iteration. Even with all the changes they still have very strange convetions such as numbering CPU's starting at 1. If you just want to last longer on batteries you can use the cpufreq deamon, it's a strange beast in 2.4, but makes some sense in 2.6 with the /sys filesystem interface. There is an effort to backport the /sys interface if like me your laptop doesn't like 2.6. When ACPI doesn't work there are also CPU only modules that don't rely on ACPI. The only hitch is that your laptop may not be enabled if no one has posted to the list that it works for them, cuz different motherboards require different voltages and may need longer times between frequency changes than the CPU does (memory bus lines, support chips, and power supply all effect these params.) This is one of the things ACPI is supposed to tell you but most BIOSes are very broken, which is why ACPI doesn't always work when it should.

      Once it's working though your Linux laptop can be both more responsive and last longer on batteries than Windows. Windows is very conservative in interpreting ACPI tables and also doesn't have a very flexible set of frequency scaling algorithms.

  9. Re:Kernel design/architecture. by jd · · Score: 3, Informative

    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)
  10. New Kernel doesn't matter here. by deathcow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:New Kernel doesn't matter here. by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      so you are one of the small fish.

      I'm with a 2.2 million employee Telecommunications/ CABLE TV etc.. company and we are accelerating the deployment and installation of linux in the enterprise.

      the last 2 weeks have put the Top of the company in a position that they no longer can trust microsoft systems for the backbone of the company. Linux is being given the green light all over the place.

      SCO's lawsuit has zero effect on companies that have sharp upper management and employees. in fact the District vice president of sales mentioned to us in a meeting that the SCO lawsuit is to be considered a joke and ignored in our deployment research and plans.

      Sorry that your company is ran by people that do not get a complete picture before making business decisions, and best of luck to you.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:New Kernel doesn't matter here. by deathcow · · Score: 5, Funny
      Love the idea!!

      Darl, doing 24 months hard time, runs into Bubba. -- Darl, meet Bubba, he's a 350 pound homosexual dominatrix, and absolute Linux fanatic. He also admins our prison Linux machines, I mean, ADMIN'D our Linux lab. You see, once SCO started charging Linux licenses, the warden ordered Bubba to remove all Linux and only allowed him to use Microsoft products.

  11. Sco License - Does it cover crashes? by ospirata · · Score: 3, Funny

    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

  12. Small upgrade fee by DarlFromSCO · · Score: 5, Funny

    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$
  13. For that desktop box, try the 2.6.0 kernels... by sonicattack · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    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 ... sooner it'll be stable! :)

    1. Re:For that desktop box, try the 2.6.0 kernels... by nvrrobx · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have to agree with you fully on this one.

      I'm running 2.6.0-test3-mm on my dual PIII 600 box. It's not a fast machine, but with 2.6.0 it feels downright snappy. (The machine is a Dell Precision 210M Workstation - 384 megs of PC100 RAM, a 5400 RPM hard drive, GeForce4 Ti 4200 card)

      The system as a whole feels a lot faster than it did with 2.4.x.. Of course, I have no real perf numbers to throw at you, but I'm really impressed with 2.6. VMware and WineX has some issues with 2.6 (CD-ROM access doesn't like to work correctly)

      Also, the new kernel build process is much more streamlined, and building a kernel doesn't seem to take as long. The output is even prettier. :)

  14. Crypto API by njchick · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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!

    1. Re:Crypto API by iggymanz · · Score: 5, Funny

      It took some time to explain to the government that the "bad guys" already have access to strong encryption

      you must mean those damn Canadians

  15. Fast moderation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe the moderator is a subscriber, and saw your post before you submitted it.

  16. Re:Kernel design/architecture. by shaitand · · Score: 5, Funny

    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?

  17. Re:Too fast... again! by BillKaos · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  18. Cmedia Bug Fix by ciroknight · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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
    1. Re:Cmedia Bug Fix by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 3, Informative

      Changelog is your friend.
      Summary of changes from v2.4.22-pre5 to v2.4.22-pre6

      snip
      o fix a race in the plugin api for ac97
      o example ac97 plugin codec
      Then, a bit earlier (lower down in the Changelog) and also from Alan:
      o update AC97 codec core
      o switch cards to new ac97_audio
      o switch i810 to generalised digital out, new ac97
      o ac97 updates
      o update trident, fix printks, new ac97
      o Update via audio - fix problems esd, mpg321
      o update to new ac97_codec
      o update ac97 codec headers

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
  19. Guide to installing a new linux kernel by bigberk · · Score: 3, Informative

    This short guide walks you through the steps used to compile and install a new 2.4 kernel.

  20. Re:What IS NEW!!! by BillKaos · · Score: 3, Informative

    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

  21. Re:I thought Linus was in charge of Linux? by lederhosen · · Score: 4, Informative

    No he is not, he is the boss of the 2.6 releases.

  22. For those of us unenlightened by Matey-O · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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."
    1. Re:For those of us unenlightened by DrWhizBang · · Score: 4, Informative

      Building a Custom Kernel.

      enjoy!

      i tried several times to compile a kernel on redhat until i realized that they have changed things a bit, and you need to follow their docs.

      --
      Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
    2. Re:For those of us unenlightened by digitalhermit · · Score: 3, Informative

      Since RedHat adds a bunch of patches you'll need to start with the Linus source that the RedHat kernel is based upon, then add the patches from that kernel to bring it up to the new.

      It's not exactly easy.

      There will be hundreds of files that change from the stock kernel to the RedHat kernel. Then there are the hundreds more that change from the stock release to the next stock release.

      Your best option is to use a kernel from the RedHat beta releases then recompile it for the current. These will *usually* work, but there are no guarantees. It's pretty simple to rebuild a kernel RPM:

      rpmbuild --rebuild --target=athlon kernel-2.4.22-20.9.src.rpm

  23. You mean like this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    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.

  24. Re:What's the point (Vanilla kernels in redhat) by alpharoid · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  25. This is BS by irix · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.
  26. other fixes by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 3, Funny

    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.

  27. Re:Does this affect 2.5.x/2.6.x? by jcaplan · · Score: 3, Informative

    Forgiven.

    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 ... 2.6. The general idea is to backport security, stability and driver patches and leave the architectural changes alone.

    -Jon