Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux 2.4.22 Stable Kernel Released

Posted by simoniker on from the latest-and-greatest dept.

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."

20 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. 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 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?
  3. 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

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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$
  8. 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! :)

  9. 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

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

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

  11. 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?

  12. 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.

  13. 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...