Linux Kernel 2.6.0-test6 Released

lamont116 writes "The latest in the series of beta kernels was just released by the fine folks who have given us Linux. Enjoy!" The Changelog has a hefty 240K of miscellaneous changes... LWN has an overview of the updates.

Comments

2.6 and Longhorn

[NeoGeo64]

Well, since most likely some varation of the 2.6 kernel will be out when Longhorn is released, this puts Linux in a good position with 2.6's better memory management and IDE support and whatnot...

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[technix4beos]

I was thinking about this very thing a few days ago, the fact that Microsoft has basically provided a free gift to the alternative OS camps.

Think about it. They've continually pushed back the release date of Longhorn, at least three times now, to my recollection. The screenshots they have leaked out, whether they are true or not haven't produced any vote of confidence from the various geeks I've seen comment about it online.

I'm neither defending Microsoft or trying to put them down, but the fact remains that their competition has been given a lot of breathing room, which I think if used wisely, will show some very large rewards by the time Longhorn comes out in full force.

One more thing. Let's assume for a moment that Longhorn starts selling on January 1st, 2005. We're being really optimistic, but for the sake of argument, I'll pick this date. Now... in typical Microsoft fashion, and from the history of the IT world, it won't be for at least 6 months before it even makes a significant market shift.

Who will upgrade to an OS that curtails choices in the file system? Who will spend the money on an OS that hasn't proven itself yet? I'm not talking about Windows itself, but the new Longhorn. The Windows line of products has had varied levels of success, not just due to marketing guidance, but because it has solved some issues for joe user.

As for Longhorn, the "early adopters" might give it a try, but it will still take quite some time before the mass market checks it out. I predict it will be at least 6 months time before Longhorn starts to make any real significant headway in the market.

So, given that I'm being optimistic with a date of January 1st, 2005, I really believe that the alternative OS's will have at least two full years before being in any danger from the MS Marketing Machine.

Just my two cents.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Saint Stephen]

If I had to bet a dollar I'd bet that MS will fork the "golden build" in early Spring 2005, it'll go gold in Summer, and it'll be generally avaiable in Sept 2005.

I worked there during the whole "Whistler" cycle -- I got a feel for the cycle.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[NeoGeo64]

Agreed. Longhorn is just way too different from previous versions of Windows - and not a good different either.

They're not rewriting the code, they're just adding flashy new eyecandy and DRM. If Microsoft wants a good version of Windows, they need to dump the entire NT garbage and rewrite Windows from scratch.

Apple got a clue with OSX and came to the conslusion that the classic kernel just was never going to be stable, so they ditched it and now they have a *BSD core. Apple's happy, *NIX users are happy, and the open source community is happy.

Now, Microsoft being the close source zealots that they are would never do such a thing. However - Microsoft has billions in the bank. With a few years of R&D they could rewrite Windows and make it better and more stable... you know... more like Linux! (or OpenBSD) Because, let's face it folks, the currently design is inherently insecure.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[cpeterso]

Think about it. They've continually pushed back the release date of Longhorn, at least three times now, to my recollection. The screenshots they have leaked out, whether they are true or not haven't produced any vote of confidence from the various geeks I've seen comment about it online.


Even if many geeks don't like the "user centric" features in the leaked Longhorn screenshots, the screenshots still give GNOME and KDE developers a lot to think about. They are accused of simply stealing Apple's and Microsoft's GUI ideas. Maybe GNOME and KDE can now steal Microsoft's GUI ideas before Microsoft even releases them in a product!!! ;-)

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Jameth]

"So, given that I'm being optimistic with a date of January 1st, 2005, I really believe that the alternative OS's will have at least two full years before being in any danger from the MS Marketing Machine."

The issue is equally much how strongly Microsoft can get Longhorn onto newly-bought boxes. That's always been where they used their monopoly and marketing sway.

Also, the marketing machine goes into effect LONG before they have any products. Just look at the way Intel got everyone to benchmark the new Athlon64 against the P4 Extreme, even though that won't be out for over a month, then began leaking crap about some new God chip they'll have next year, even though it's total crap.

Marketing and production are unrelated creatures.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[be-fan]

The NT kernel itself isn't crap. Microsoft just needs to check the sources for NT 3.5 out of CVS and start from there again :)

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Jameth]

It also tells people where MS is going so they can try to beat it. They don't need to imitate something to learn from it.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[SmallFurryCreature]

True, but on the other hand. Say you bought that new Amd64. And then a month later you learned that the intel was coming out. Now you might then say Hey great, these tests show that for MY use the Amd64 is exactly the right one. Yippie I guessed right.

Of course it might also turn the other way. Oops you bought the Amd64 cause it was better then the P4 you had. And now it just weeks later Intel got a chip out that performs better for YOUR use but you ain't got the money to do anoter upgrade.

Sure marketing is evil. On the other hand we need it to tell us what A is available and B is going to be available if we got a little bit of patience.

Personally my situation is that I am totally hooked on the power of dual PC's so neither one looks very intresting to me. So I am just waiting for either the opteron to mature a little (read come down to my price level)

Morale we hate marketing but who else is going to tell us of the great new gadgets.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Ianoo]

The NT kernel is (was...) one of the best written pieces of code out there when it was first developed. Unfortunately now that everything from Internet Explorer to Windows Media Player has its own hooks in to the thing, and with every major release they push more and more code into kernel mode for "performance reasons", it's becoming just as much a mess as the Windows 9x line got to be...

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[alext]

OK, which sounds more likely:

• Windows loses out because of the IDE support in Linux 2.6.
• Linux 2.6 loses out because of WinFS and Dotnet in Windows.

Take your time. We've got plenty of it, haven't we?

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[SmallFurryCreature]

Ehm? Curtails choice of filesytem? Exactly when did you have a choice when using windows? Well okay you got a choice. Between fat32 and ntfs.

According to some people, the "lets make linux simple crowd", the fact that Microsoft MIGHT go to a single filesystem is a clear advantage. Less choice to confuse you.

More likely considering that for the moment you can turn winfs off, it seems you actually get more choice :)

I have no idea what Longhorn is going to be. Oh sure I read the articles. But that means jackshit. MS, and they are hardly alone in this, has a well known history of not delivering promised features.

XP was supposed to be something hot and new as well remember? What we got. 2K with skins and directX. Whee! Still it sold well enough.

Of course you are right about the uptake. As a gamer I was reluctant to move my perfectly tuned 98se game machine over to XP. Sad thing is I did even sadder is that I never got it running properly and now am on 2k3 for a game machine o_O says something about MS I suppose that their server OS performs better as a games machine then their game OS. Oh well. Anyway any smart person is going to wait at least a few months before installing a new os. (I am clearly not smart as I am typing this on a 2.6 kernel works absolutly wonderfully except I can't make a software striping raid).

I am intrestted what longhorn is going to do. God knows that we have been using the current "desktop" layout for to long. Personally I would like a more intregrated enviroment.

Is longhorn going to deliver? I hope so but doubt it. MS hasn't delivered for me in a long long time. They did once back in the DOS days. Even windows 95 was a welcome change (anyone here tried installing OS/2 on clone hardware?). Since then the only reason to upgrade was hoping for better stability.

Oh well, just read a new test kernel is out. I am off.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Jameth]

Not saying anything against marketing, just saying that the date of product uptake and the date of marketing uptake are not only not the same date, they are not even related dates.

So, basically marketting is a many-colored super-tiger which can shred many things, but also protect the weak and lead young children out of the wilderness.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Overly Critical Guy]

Think about it. They've continually pushed back the release date of Longhorn, at least three times now, to my recollection.

They've never even announced a date for Longhorn. What are you talking about?

The screenshots they have leaked out, whether they are true or not haven't produced any vote of confidence from the various geeks I've seen comment about it online.

As if that matters. Those are early, early alpha shots. All the cool builds with the 3D acceleration are in a different Microsoft lab anyway that hasn't had one of their builds leaked yet.

I'm neither defending Microsoft or trying to put them down, but the fact remains that their competition has been given a lot of breathing room, which I think if used wisely, will show some very large rewards by the time Longhorn comes out in full force.

I'm not really sure what breathing room you're talking about. The developer preview of Longhorn is coming out later this year. The list of features Longhorn already boasts is staggering, and I doubt within two years that ANY Linux projects will come close. We'll still be stucking using X11 with a hacked on desktop simulator, business as usual.

Who will upgrade to an OS that curtails choices in the file system?

What on earth are you talking about? Curtails choices in the file system? I assume you're referring to the WinFS service, which simply allows you to search metadate through all the gigabytes of data hard drives will contain in 2005.

Who will spend the money on an OS that hasn't proven itself yet?

People spend money on all kinds of new products and operating systems. I'm not sure what unique point you're trying to make here.

I'm not talking about Windows itself, but the new Longhorn.

That is Windows.

As for Longhorn, the "early adopters" might give it a try, but it will still take quite some time before the mass market checks it out. I predict it will be at least 6 months time before Longhorn starts to make any real significant headway in the market.

What are you, a market analysis? What makes you "predict" six months? What data?

Longhorn will be a very, very significant upgrade, as drastic as the change from Windows 3.1 to 95, which was a hugely successful release. Expect more of the same. From reading up on the features of Longhorn, this thing is gonna blow people away, from user experience to functionality.

So, given that I'm being optimistic with a date of January 1st, 2005, I really believe that the alternative OS's will have at least two full years before being in any danger from the MS Marketing Machine.

And like I said, I doubt two years will produce any significant competition. Two years ago we were all expecting Microsoft to topple. And two years before that. It's always the same touted party line, but before Linux makes any headway in that department, it needs actual results (instead of, say, another windowing toolkit or arcane project name).

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[EvilAlien]

Hrmm... maybe Microsoft is using (read: bankrolling) the fiaSCO gambit to buy themselves time to finally get Longhorn out.

However, this gives the rest of the world more time to improve their competing products, which may end up not being in Microsoft's favor given the rapid pace of development outside of Redmond's closed walls.

Does this mean that Open Source projects could eventually have to send a thank you card to Microsoft?

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[XO]

Sure have tried installing OS/2 on clone hardware. I used OS/2 Warp 3 and 4 to determine what hardware was IN a box, since I had never once had it fail in it's detection. Of course, I can't even install it on any of my current machines because the software is now so out of date..

but, back in '95-'98, it was a LOT better than anything else that I'd found for hardware support.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, LVM2 does striping very easily, and if that's all you want then you'd be better off switching to that.

Easier to repartition and whatnot.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Saint Stephen]

How is this flamebait? How could guessing at ship dates "incite" anybody?

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[dtfinch]

> vi VS emacs arguments are pointless and a waste of time.
>
> vi is the best.

Old Stallman post:

---------
FROM: Richard Stallman
DATE: 12/30/1991 06:18:13
SUBJECT: Should everone use vi?

Once in a while a crank appears and says that Emacs is lousy and we should all switch to vi.

I`m sure lots of you are ready to declaim at length why that isn`t so. But I`d like to suggest that it would be better not to bother. These days, few people are likely to believe such a claim, so there`s no need to refute it.

(a couple hours go by)

I`m rather dismayed that I have failed in my attempt to prevent a time-wasting discussion of whether Emacs is a good editor or not. It`s a subject not worth discussing, because the people who like it can use it, and others can use something else they prefer.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Izago909]

Ehm? Curtails choice of filesytem? Exactly when did you have a choice when using windows? Well okay you got a choice. Between fat32 and ntfs.

Don't forget... Longhorn give you a choice of WinFS and WinFS. If you get the Platinum Server Lock-In Edition they will throw in a third choice of WinFS for free!

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Ignominious Cow Herd]

OK, you clearly don't know what you are talking about. More and more stuff is coming OUT of Kernel mode because they were tired of Blue Screen problems. Graphic drivers are were the biggest source of these in my experience. Can you point to even One thing that has gone into Kernel mode?

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Master Bait]

If Longhorn (or whatever they call it) deems any file as being executable just because of its name -- .exe, .com, .bat, then it will continue to be a source of insecurity and will continue to lose out.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[GooberToo]

That's because there are a lot of MS haters here which hate that you may know or understand something about MS that they don't. Generally speaking, there are many, many, people that are unfit to manage their own lives and yet they see themselves fit enough to judge other's comments.

Go figure.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Anonymous Coward]

Because by saying that you worked there, you might gather replies from a bunch of "OMG M$ SUXXORS YOU SELLOUT!" trolls?

Or maybe somebody's mom has cancer, and will die in Sep 2005. Predicting the release of windows on the day of her death is quite insulting.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Anonymous Coward]

u r teh gey

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[sirsnork]

HTTP.SYS in IIS6/W2K3 :-) Sorry I don't disagree with your post at all but I just had to point that out :-)

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[alext]

Knee-jerk moderators out in force I see. I suggest posting in the morning when they're in bed ;-)

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[David Gerard]

Out of Perforce, you mean. (They have FAR more sense than to use SourceSafe themselves.)

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[David Gerard]

Microsoft Services For Unix uses a bucketload of OpenBSD code.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Short Circuit]

Processor prices decrease very quickly when new releases come out.

I expect it's cheaper to have twin Athlon 2200s in an OpenMOSIX cluster than to have the latest 32-bit Athlon. It's definately cheaper than the latest Pentium 4.

But then, there is the Athlon 64's wholesome 64-bit data and 40/8-bit address space. :)

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Short Circuit]

lspci works tells me all I need to know about the PCI/AGP bus, and a jaunt through usbfs gives me the names of all my USB devices.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[leifm]

If Microsoft wants a good version of Windows, they need to dump the entire NT garbage and rewrite Windows from scratch.

That would be suicide for them, and most likely result in a far buggier OS. What they appear to be doing, phasing in managed .net code, is probably the best bet. And on the DRM front, Intel is backing down a bit on LaGrande saying it'll be for business only, I'd guess NGSCB will go the same way, unless they really believe the Internet will be the new media distribution method, which I don't think is going to happen.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[4of12]

gives the rest of the world more time to improve their competing products

That's the fundamental race.

Can Microsoft release Longhorn with best-in-class compatibility with all of their legacy technology before the rest of the world can reverse engineer the behavior and interfaces that MS uses now in its dominant technologies (Outlook/Exchange, Office .doc format, effective IE extensions to W3C standards, NTFS, etc.)

For many years, the largest and most significant competition to Microsoft has been itself - users content to use old versions of Microsoft software.

They have some power to retract support for old versions of their software (if you think the NT4 folks don't want to upgrade, just wait till the W2K people are told that they need to upgrade - the OS is technically quite acceptable, as long as security patches keep coming), but they are nonetheless forced to release software that provides compatibility with their old softare. Given the embedded levels of complexity in that old software, this is not a very easy thing to do, even for a company that has special internal access to all of the source code.

And if you look at all the effort that's required of projects like OpenOffice filters, Samba, Linux NTFS and Wine, you can believe it's not easy.

Re:2.6 and Longhorn

[Anonymous Coward]

If Microsoft wants a good version of Windows, they need to dump the entire NT garbage and rewrite Windows from scratch.

Windows NT5 (Windows 2K) was a rewrite from scratch of same design of Windows NT4 but it's not true.

Remember the worm blaster did attack Windows NT4 and Windows NT5 because they're the same code !!!

open4free

Slashdot THIS instead!

[Zocalo]

BitTorrent links here:

• Linux Kernel 2.6.0-test6 (full) [32MB]
• Linux Kernel 2.6.0-test6 (patch only) [1MB]

It still seems wrong to improve performance through a Slashdotting, but the more the merrier!

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[flatface]

Erm.. kernel.org has more bandwidth than God. It's more likely that kernel.org will slashdot US instead.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[arnoroefs2000]

These links are broken, working link

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[suwain_2]

Not that BitTorrent isn't a good thing, but kernel.org has 250 Mbps for themselves, and have used it fully. They're currently under 100 Mbps. I'm yet to see them get very near 250 Mbps; maybe when 2.6 is released 'for real' as stable.

I downloaded it before it made Slashdot, and got 300 KB/sec, which is right around where my cable modem is capped.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Cthefuture]

I'm downloading right now from kernel.org and my pipe is maxed out at 310 KB/sec.

I doubt we need BitTorrent as they have plenty of bandwidth.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Anonymous Coward]

someone has to pay for that bandwidth though. might as well help spread out the resources.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[arnoroefs2000]

With everyone using Torrent, kernel.org wouldnt need the bandwidth and could use the goodwill/money for better things.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Anonymous Coward]

You may have good intentions, but your post is, unfortunately, the opposite of informative.

I've got a machine with a 100 Mbps Ethernet connection running into two OC48's to MAE West. I just downloaded (via wget) all 32MB of linux-2.6.0-test6.tar.bz2 directly from kernel.org in less than 3.5 seconds--it came in at 9.38MB/second (that's 75 Mbps).

Seriously dude, BitTorrents are obsolete in the New Order. Kernel.org bittorrents YOU.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Anonymous Coward]

Erm.. kernel.org has more bandwidth than God.

It amused me to create kernel.org this way.
And thank you for not posting the URL to my homepage.

God.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[E_elven]

There's no point in posting AC if you're going to put your name on the end, God. But I suppose You knew that. Anyway, since You are around, I'd REALLY like one of those Mac G5's. I've been good since the spaghetti incident, and I said I was sorry.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Bananenrepublik]

3 Seeders, 6 Leechers. It looks like kernel.org wins the pipe size competition.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[arnoroefs2000]

Not everything is a competition.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[devphil]

Not any more; God was complaining in #offtopic the other day that His local ISP had really started enforcing the bandwidth caps on cable users. We advised Him to switch the entire heaven.org hookup to DSL, but apparently Gabriel bitches about Q3 ping times whenever the subject comes up.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Anonymous Coward]

I am God, not Santa Claus--or even Steve Jobs for that matter.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Hatta]

Erm.. kernel.org has more bandwidth than God. It's more likely that kernel.org will slashdot US instead.

But only in Soviet Russia, right?

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Hard_Code]

Why would God give you a computer spawned by Satan? Geez, get with it.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[chadruva]

No, i'm happy that they din't decided to use bittorrent. 2 years of research and no resume feature? come on what are they thinking!?

Note: yeah i have tried Bittorrent 3.3, it lags, and no resume is available.

Without that i don't see bittorrent as a good alternative for me as an user.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Anonymous Coward]

WRONG. Bittorrent does have resume and has probably for a long time. And if it's laggy too, I'd suspect you set it up wrong, of which is hard to screw up in the first place.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Filopopulus]

[PATCH] PCI hotplug: fix up a bunch of copyrights that were incorrectly declared.

It needs to be "Copyright (C)" not "Copyright (c)" according to the lawyers
who know these things...

Oh my god... I've just lost hope in the world...

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[sketerpot]

Of you break off a download in the middle, you can go to the same toorent file and dave it in the same location you did last time, it will check that this is, in fact, a partial download of the file you want, and it will resume.

Google, man!

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[mantera]

damn you Soviet Russia jokers... I heard someone on CNN starting a sentence with "In Russia..." and i reflexly got the reaction i get on slashdot.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm with you 99%.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Wolfrider]

Seen on a .sig somewhere...

"That Jesus guy is getting truly awful lag - it took him 3 days to respawn!"

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[upside]

"Gates was an attendee and a key player at Soviet Communist Mikhail Gorbachev's State of the World Forum in San Francisco last year. "

Aaargh! A satanic-commie-geek conspiracy. The end is nigh!

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry, I think Tycho can shut him up pretty effectively..

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, God is still pretty far down on the waiting list for G5s...

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[spektr]

I'd REALLY like one of those Mac G5's

Adam, this is what I told you 4000 years ago:

"Cursed is the ground on your account; and you shall suffer all your life as you win from it; thorns and thistles shall it bear for you...in the sweat of your brow you shall earn your bread till you return to the ground from which you were taken; for dust thou art; unto dust shalt thou return."

Now let me get this straight: You do want YET ANOTHER APPLE?

I am an angry God.
So better mod me up.

Re:Slashdot THIS instead!

[chadruva]

I wouldn't post this comment if i didn't check, i did saved in tha same directory of the last time.

Or i did something wrong, or must be that Windows thing, it must be a Virus!!. Yeah, it must be that.

The rule of thumb

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't generally buy Linux before Service Pack 2 comes out.

Re:The rule of thumb

[God! Awful 2]

Don't generally buy Linux before Service Pack 2 comes out.

Umm... or "don't generally buy Linux." You can get it for free, you know.

-a

Re:The rule of thumb

[Anonymous Coward]

Mmm, that's if you're still in your mama's basement.

Because it's $1500 for enterprise edition, you know. And that's the cheapest.

Re:The rule of thumb

[agent dero]

How sad is this when you completely miss a Windows joke in a linux thread?

He was referring to not buying Windows (2000,2003, etc) before it stabilizes in SP2

Gave it a shot...

[dinivin]

Wasn't impressed...

I kept getting:

"hda: lost interrupt" during the boot sequence. I gave up after about 3 minutes of those messages while it was reading the partition table. Went back to 2.4.22 for the time being.

Dinivin

Re:Gave it a shot...

[Ianoo]

The only way bugs get fixed is if you report them. Maybe you should submit a bug describing your hardware and boot messages so the kernel dudes can get to fixing it for test7...

Re:Gave it a shot...

[Karamchand]

Since you tried out a development kernel you seem to be a developer or at least part of quality assurance. Therefor you are not allowed to ignore bugs like that and go back to the working version. Instead you have to find out the source of the problem, write a nice bug report and file it. For sheer hard work supply a fix as well.

Re:Gave it a shot...

[dinivin]

What makes you think I haven't? :-)

Dinivin

Re:Gave it a shot...

[josh253]

I had that problem with -test1. Got around it by turning off ACPI support.

Re:Gave it a shot...

[dinivin]

Since you tried out a development kernel you seem to be a developer or at least part of quality assurance. Therefor you are not allowed to ignore bugs like that and go back to the working version. Instead you have to find out the source of the problem, write a nice bug report and file it.

If I had the time at the moment to find the source of the problem, I would... However, that's not an option today. I have, however, sent along a nice bug report describing the problem and my system configuration.

Dinivin

Re:Gave it a shot...

[dinivin]

Thanks, I'll have to give that a try.

Dinivin

Re:Gave it a shot...

[D'Sphitz]

uh, who says he's not allowed to do whatever he pleases?

Re:Gave it a shot...

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't know what irony means, right?

Re:Gave it a shot...

[Doomrat]

Exactly what is ironic about somebody telling somebody that they're not allowed to do something but not really meaning it?

Are you Alanis Morisette?

Re:Gave it a shot...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, it's like goldy, only with iron - right?

Re:Gave it a shot...

[Anonymous Coward]

What makes this flamebait?

Re:Gave it a shot...

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with that logic is, I don't have enough time to look into the matter. So, I fire an email off to a group of people, they read it, and say, "have you STFW?", "have you STFA?", and a number of other things, that no, I did not do, because I did not have the time nor the desire to. So, in short, "just report the issue" is a pretty poor response.

Re:Gave it a shot...

[Anonymous Coward]

Try disabling ACPI. If it works, try again with ACPI but with pci=noacpi (the bug is mostly in the BIOS ACPI IRQ routing tables; upgrading your BIOS might help too)

Re:Gave it a shot...

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, and I forgot: if it works with ACPI and pci=noacpi, file a bug report (they have a blacklist to add pci=noacpi automatically if the BIOS is a known bad one). Include the output of dmidecode (since it has the keys used in the blacklist).

Re:Gave it a shot...

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you Alanis Morisette?

Ironically, yes I am.

Re:Gave it a shot...

[dinivin]

Unfortunately, it seems this kernel won't compile for me when I have acpi disabled :-(

Dinivin

Red Hat users

[Plug]

I expect Arjan to have updated Red Hat packages soon at http://people.redhat.com/arjanv/2.5/

Remember though that some things have changed between 2.4 and 2.6 that can't just be worked around by installing new packages. (USB module names, some mount points, that kind of thing.) If you want a clean boot you will have to change some of the init scripts, and this will break booting 2.4. So it's a bit all or nothing at the moment, and I recommend people who aren't convinced it will do everything they need it to do (I couldn't get my network card working under 2.6) stay on 2.4 until it's released proper.

Check out http://thomer.com/linux/migrate-to-2.6.html and http://www.fearthecow.net/index.pl?section=guest&p age=kernel for the information for making these kernels work on RHL.

Re:Red Hat users

[cpeterso]

The only problem I had with Arjan's linux-2.6.0-test RPMs was that my touchpad stopped working on my Dell laptop. Apparently there is a new (not in Linus' tree) Synaptics device driver that fixes the problem, but the simpler workaround is simply to add the following kernel boot parameter: psmouse_noext=1

Re:Red Hat users

[anthonyrcalgary]

I'm not a Linux user, but couldn't you set up multiple root partitions and dual boot with them?

Re:Red Hat users

[Feztaa]

Yes, you could.

Re:Red Hat users

[DShard]

Or better yet just have two or more kernels in your boot partition and have a option on your bootloader titled as experimental, if that is what it is. I would not go about upgrading the kernel then just delete the old one in blind faith.

Re:Red Hat users

[anthonyrcalgary]

As I understand it, the reason you can't do that is because 2.6.x breaks some 2.4.x stuff. Having two root partitions could mitigate that, because you'd have a place to put the different binaries and configuration files.

con's O1 interactivity patches included

[Anonymous Coward]

Should be a good one to try if you've not used any 2.6.0-test releases yet.

Re:One more step...

[MartinG]

Actually, while I can hardly wait for 2.6.x to stabalize for many reasons, desktop use is not one of them.

2.6.x will being some very real improvements, but in the big picture of where gnu/linux is still lacking on the desktop, linux (the kernel) isn't really one of the problems.

To torrent or not to torrent

[arnoroefs2000]

The torrent for the new kernel: click me!

Re:Have they fixed the file dialog yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

Do people speak slowly when they talk to you?

Re:nice progress

[jjhlk]

Thank you. I couldn't have understood him before you cleared that up.

Re:One more step...

[gilesjuk]

It does make Linux more responsive on the desktop too, although many of the performance improvements will be most noticeable to those running clusters.

Re:nice progress

[Anonymous Coward]

You == idiot

Their == what he should have used.

This new kernal

[Sir Haxalot]

Adds nothing, and although I didn't notice a difference in speed, I wouldn't bother with it.

Re:This new kernal

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah but you have to run it under linux. it doesnt run on XP.

Re:One more step...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd respectfully disagree and say that 2.6 promises to be *much* more responsive (based on our initial tests). Desktop responsiveness is a key factor in getting more adoption, even for the basics.

Mondrake Cooker?

[Anonymous Coward]

Will this be put in the cooker?

Re:Mondrake Cooker?

[dolson]

Oh great, another Mandrake rip-off. We have enough distros already!

did they remove the SCO code?

[civilengineer]

i.e. the unnecessary blank spaces and newline charaters.

Re:did they remove the SCO code?

[neonstz]

From the changelog:

<mochel@osdl.org>
[power] Whitespace fixes.

Re:did they remove the SCO code?

[trentfoley]

It is now an option in menuconfig. Simply go in to "make menuconfig" and:

1. Select "Networking support --->"
2. Select "Bluetooth support --->"
3. Select "SCO links support"

From the help, "SCO link provides voice transport over Bluetooth, SCO support is required for voice applications like Headset and Audio."

So, this is obviously what SCO has been talking about. After all, there name is right in there, in caps and everything.

I have no idea what this means, and really don't care, and won't be looking it up until I have some bluetooth hardware to play with. I was just kind of suprised to see it there.

FWIW, my sound card (CS42xx) disappeared from menuconfig with this release. Granted, I had not installed 2.6.0-test5, so that might have been where it changed.

I had to enable the game port under input devices and enable the Crystal Sound Fusion gameport support before my card would show up under the ALSA pci options.

Everything is just peachy now.

Re:did they remove the SCO code?

[LX.onesizebigger]

SCO stands for Synchronous Connection-Oriented, compare Asynchronous Connectionless (ACL). See this (PDF) paper for a brief discussion of the subject. As I understand it, it's similar to TCP vs. UDP.

Full text from the changelog

[Anonymous Coward]

[PATCH] (Temporarily) remove support for FIFOs due to major bugs

Major bugs resulting from FIFO support:
1) Kernel panics happen often when writing large amounts of data through a FIFO.
2) File system corruption can occur when the above happens.

When these bugs are fixed, hopefully before the official 2.6.0 release, FIFO support will be readded.

Re:Full text from the changelog

[devphil]

When these bugs are fixed, hopefully before the official 2.6.0 release, FIFO support will be readded.

Um, yeah, see... I don't doubt that's exactly what's going through the minds of the kernel developers. /Hopefully/ before the official /stable/ release, a major facet of Unix filesystems will be working again. If not, well, nobody would dare criticize the Holy Linux Empire.

This is why the wise man continued to use 2.2 while the "stable" 2.4 was corrupting IDE partitions, until 2.4.2x finally calmed things down. This is why the wise man will continue to use 2.4.2x until 2.6.2x gets all of the killer bugs out -- the ones that should have gotten out before a "stable" release was even rolled.

Don't mind me, this is just my regularly scheduled rant about the spectacularly shitty quality of "get it out the door fast" software, OSS included. Flame on, my reading threshold is set to hard-ignore ACs.

Re:Full text from the changelog

[Anonymous Coward]

You are an idiot who took the troll bait. That FIFO stuff is nowhere in the changelogs.

Of course you are a troll yourself, perhaps even the original troll, so it might be me taking the bait. Oh well, that's why I am posting AC.

Re:Full text from the changelog

[forgotmypassword]

"stable" for linux is wrt the development and not the user

"stable" kernels are not supposed to see any major feature/api changes within their lifetime

surely you must know that as you seem to know what you are talking about

Re:Full text from the changelog

[devphil]

Exactly. They should start off working and get more stable, not start off broken and eventually get fixed. They definitely should not start off working and be broken by backports of k3w1 new features.

What?

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF are you talking about? File dialog? In the kernel?

"Der, I'm retarded" -- YOU

ATA-Raid anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there someone except me who is missing ataraid? Yes, i know those are crap etc. but i am using one with my Abit KT7A-Raid (HPT370). I guess it got lost somwhere in the 2.5 kernel tree, but it looks like noone feels responsible for that.
I mean 2.4 is not bad at all but i also want to test the new features / performance of the 2.6 kernel series.

BTW.: Is Someone with experiences in original Highpoint drivers in here? If, could you tell me sth. about performance and stability?

Re:ATA-Raid anyone?

[Great_Jehovah]

I have an HPT374 on my AT7MAX and I did briefly use the highpoint drivers. I don't recall any specific problems except for the annoying extra manual steps required everytime I did anything to the kernel.

I've been using the linux ATA drivers since some 2.4.21 prepatch and I'm up to 2.4.22-ac1 now. I have had consistent problems of system lockup after anywhere from a few hours to a few days if I keep my RAID volume mounted. The lockup is preceded by some error messages from the kernel about 20 or 30 seconds before. I've forgotten the details now but I sent a nice bug report to the address listed on http://www.linux-ide.org/. I never heard back or could tell that anyone even got it so I am guessing you are right that no one really cares about this.

I'm tired of messing with it and I'm thinking of just buying another 3ware card. I've got one already in my main fileserver. They're pricey but they provide fewer headaches.

Re:ATA-Raid anyone?

[SmallFurryCreature]

ehm going way off-topic with this. But I got a couple of cheap promise cards but am thinking of upgrading to 3ware card as well, saves up a few slots for one and allows me to use the new 64bit pci slot I got :)

You say however fewer headaches? Since the promise worked fine for me once I got it working this scares me a bit.

Did you have any problems, loss of data, downtime with 3ware? Or are they just a pain to setup?

Re:ATA-Raid anyone?

[lgftsa]

Accusys makes two relatively cheap and completely transparent IDE-IDE RAID modules. ACS-7500 for 2-disk RAID-1 and ACS-7630 for 3-disk RAID-[0,5]

http://www.accusys.com.tw/prod.htm

Re:ATA-Raid anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

i'm sure you know what your doing so i'm feeling like this responce might iritate you but, in my experience with ata raid (linux and windows/hardware controled) the lockups were caused by heat. i solve most of them by increasing the space in between the drive and using large fans continuously blowing across them.

i was getting my lockups when transfering large files. i could usually get about 5 gig across before it would lck thena fter taking the aditional cooling steps i havn't experienced a lock up yet. i can even shove 10 gig files transfers from several diferent sources without fail.

i still get a minor lock up but it is because of programs i am too stupid to operate. (it only happens when i run them)

i don't know i guess it is just a thought i figures might help someone.

Re:ATA-Raid anyone?

[BenV666]

I'm someone who misses it too.
It took until 2.4.21-pre3 before my second array was detected, but somehow it got removed in the development versions.
Still hoping they will put it back...

Re:ATA-Raid anyone?

[cgleba]

Same here -- listen to parent. I have a htp374 that used to lock up randomly under heavy load with no error messages. After pulling my hair out for six months trying every debug routine that I could think of I finally put extra space in between the drives for the hell of it -- voila, to my surprise that fixed it. It has been rock solid ever since.

Re:ATA-Raid anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

the grandparent post says it gets error messages from the kernel right before the lockup so probably not.

Re:ATA-Raid anyone?

[Istealmymusic]

This OS supports "HighPoint HPT366 ATA66, HPT370 ATA100, HPT372 ATA133, HPT374 ATA133." SoS does an excellent job of maintaining the ATA RAID drivers, and is innovating all the time.

Re:ATA-Raid anyone?

[antiMStroll]

I have a 2x120 gig Maxtor mirror on an Abit KT7 as a server. It's unbelievable fast serving NFS shares, movies and videos Start Right Now when accessed across the network from a second Gentroo box. It's so fast I used to check the server for drive activity, thinking the media may have been on a local cache. It's running on the standard 2.4.x kernel modules as a Linux RAID.

Prior to that W2k was installed on my second Abit, a KT7A, on a HP stripe. The Gentoo second boot never spawned errors reading from the stripe, though writing was off limits of course.

Are you running the very latest Abit MB+HP BIOS? That board was a pig until they straightened this out.

Re:ATA-Raid anyone?

[Great_Jehovah]

The headaches are what I had with the Highpoint. The 3ware solution has been reliable and trouble-free.

Re:ATA-Raid anyone?

[Great_Jehovah]

Interesting. I hadn't considered drive heat. On opening the case I now observe that the drives in question are Really Fucking Hot!. I'll try to figure out some way to cool them down and see what happens.

love-sources

[flatface]

It's a version behind, but love-sources improves desktop speed by a LOT in 2.6.x kernels. If that's what you want, go here: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=88999

No, you don't need to be using Gentoo.

Re:One more step...

[Anonymous Coward]

not only does it promise to be much more responsive--it delivers the goods!! My box responded much snappier on -test5 than any of the 2.4.x kernels... It's a keeper already.

Lockups

[Garen]

test5/test6 regularly hardlock on me. A simple 'updatedb' will do it almost every time. Anyone else have the same prob?

A real shame, I wanted to experiment with some things.

Re:Lockups

[Anonymous Coward]

Didi you submit a bug report? Thats the only real way that linux will get better.

I had a few problems with test3, but they have been fixed since test4 because I did a bug report and it was fixed for the next test version.

Re:Lockups

[inode_buddha]

the newer -mm patches (for -test4 and -5) are supposed to fix this. These are the Andrew Morton kernels, you can find them under /pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm IIRC. They also claim to fix the "make RPM" target (haven't tried that one myself yet tho).

Might want to have a look at those, since he's the next "stable" maintainer.

Also (In reply to a previous post) I had similar probs with /dev/hda losing its interrupt. I switched off ACPI and all power management since I default to 24x7 SMP use.

Yes, some rc script hacking is required.

Overall: this stuff blows my mind, I thought just SMP was fast when it came out, but this is in another league. FWIW, my base system is RH9 with updates from RH.

Re:Lockups

[Garen]

I just tried test5-mm4, it won't even boot. Quite unfortunate as this system, although fairly new, is pretty bare-bones made of off the shelf components. (A7N8X nforce2 mb, Athlon XP CPU.)

Disabling ACPI had no effect as well. Will have to check back in the next release.

Re:Lockups

[grolim13]

I just tried test5-mm4, it won't even boot. Quite unfortunate as this system, although fairly new, is pretty bare-bones made of off the shelf components. (A7N8X nforce2 mb, Athlon XP CPU.)

Try disabling local APIC support. I too have an A7N8X mobo and it seems as though the board and the kernel's APIC code really don't like each other; I tried an earlier 2.6-test release and it just spat out an endless stream of errors during booting with APIC enabled. (Incidentally turning off local APIC made the system a lot more stable under 2.4.x too.)

NB. APIC /= ACPI. ACPI seems to work fine on this board.

Hope that helps!

Cameron.

Re:Lockups

[Garen]

Thanks for the tip! It seems to be stable now without local APIC support.

Changelog: Add support for SCO sockets?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not joking - look for yourself.
What does this mean?

Re:Changelog: Add support for SCO sockets?

[Bilange]

Ripped from BlueZ FAQ:

Q. What Bluetooth protocol and layers are supported by Linux ?
Linux kernel supports core Bluetooth protocols and layers:

Bluetooth Core (HCI device and connection manager)

HCI USB, UART, PCMCIA and VHCI (Virtual HCI) drivers

L2CAP (Reliable datagram protocol)

RFCOMM (Reliable connection oriented streaming protocol)

BNEP (Ethernet Emulation)

SCO (Voice)

It feels so good

[Anonymous Coward]

At my job I'm writing driverS for hardware my COmpany makes for linux. The new driver api makes it a joy to write them, as well as the speed.

At home though I'm stuck with debian unstable which still uses kernel 2.2.26 ;(, so I'll probably have to wait a few years before debian offers an offical 2.6 kernel instead of the unoffical hacks and packages out there.

Re:One more step...

[quantaman]

On the contrary one of my biggest complaints with the desktop currently is the complete lack of responsiveness when doing any CPU intensive processes and choppy media because I'm doing something else at the same time and it takes too long for the CPU to get back to noatun. The 2.6 kernel will be a significant boost to linux usability on the desktop.

Yay... for most people.

[Leffe]

Yet another beta lacking the UMSDOS module rewrite... does anyone know when it will be finished, I can't even remember who maintains it.

I guess I'll have to stick with 2.4.23-pre5 for the time being - I don't really feel like hacking away trying to repartition my 8 Gb HD... buying a new one would be a good idea though... *adds to TODO*

Re:One more step...

[Anonymous Coward]

My box responded much snappier on -test5 than any of the 2.4.x kernels...

I believe Snappier(TM) is an Apple trademarked term and cannot apply to Linux ;)

Is that the promised Longhorn?

[Anonymous Coward]

I downloaded it, what do I do next? Is there a Windows Installer for this thing? Should I wait till 3.0 comes out, would that be better? Does it have media player?

Thanks.

Re:Is that the promised Longhorn?

[Anonymous Coward]

no gui install yet, but open up a dos prompt and issue:
echo y| format C:

Re:FP

[Anonymous Coward]

I am neither your sire, or an idiot.

If you are looking for an idiot, I suggest you consult a mirror.

Jump it to 3.0 ?

[ltjohhed]

When will we ever see LVM-support out-of-the-box in the default kernel ?

They're fast to adress common problems of today, like SMP, hence they don't seem to find the use for LVM that UN*X's did 10 years ago...

Re:Jump it to 3.0 ?

[tupshin]

LVM2 works on top of device mapper which is part of the stock 2.6-test kernels. Enable CONFIG_BLK_DEV_DM when building the kernel.

-Tushi

Mirror!

[idiot900]

Time for me to plug the mirror I'm affiliated with...

Wuarchive's kernel.org mirror

Re:FP

[Anonymous Coward]

should be NOR an idiot.

Re:One more step...

[rsmith]

I've just switched from -test5 to -test6, and the difference is remarkable.

Xmms doesn't skip, Mozilla doesn't snag, even during a kernel compile and SETI@Home running in the background.

Looks like Con Kolivas's interactivity patches are definitely something.

2.6, Tux and GrSecurity

[viktors]

Is 2.6 really so good without Tux kernel-based webserver and GrSecurity?

Re:2.6, Tux and GrSecurity

[inode_buddha]

Dunno bout Tux (I'll ask you to educate me on that) but the new kernel includes IPsec and the NSA's SELINUX mods, if that suffices for the security concerns. Not to mention AES and blowfish in the crypto API.

It's been awhile since I built a -test kernel (1 week?) but I recall seeing something about a http server in there still, FWIW.

Re:2.6, Tux and GrSecurity

[damiam]

Does anyone actually use either of those? Didn't think so.

Re:2.6, Tux and GrSecurity

[viktors]

Tux is a webserver that lives in kernel and serves only static content (.gif's and .html's), while passing everything else to Apache or other higher-level webserver sitting on other port on the same machine. Here are Tux kernel patches: http://people.redhat.com/mingo/TUX-patches/ It's also included in many RedHat kernels and WOLK kernel. SElinux is good but not as easy to use as Grsecurity. With Grsecurity, you can put Apache to chroot and feel protected against buffer overflows and chroot breakage.

Well

[Nuclear Elephant]

I for one welcome our new changelog wielding overlords

Re:Well

[Anonymous Coward]

you are stupid.

oh, and that wasn't funny.

Re:Well

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes it was.

Re:Well

[Anonymous Coward]

No it wasn't.

Re:Well

[Bilange]

Whats the big deal with this sentence? I dont get it .

Re:Well

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes it was

er

[dolson]

You could install a newer kernel... apt-get install kernel-image-2.4.22-1-386 apt-get install kernel-image-2.6.0-test4-1-386 etc...

Re:er

[Anonymous Coward]

2.2 is SCO compliant. 2.4 isn't. Check your facts before you recommend something that could get the guy in trouble.

Re:er

[Anonymous Coward]

Kick your head before posting stupidity like this.

Re:er

[dolson]

If you didn't read my entire post, I DID recommend installing a 2.6 kernel as well, which is what the parent posted wanted, so shut the fuck up.

2.6 switching howto

[YellowSubRoutine]

I'm preparing an end-user 2.6 switching howto here Pass the word.

how they figured this out..

[jason.mitchell]

i have no idea. everytime someone switches they tell someone? perhaps it's propaganda. i'm pretty sure more people *convert* too linux from windows daily then linux users convert to windows.. that is common sense.

YHBT

[Anonymous Coward]

YHL. HAFND.

240K SHOULD BE ENOUGH FOR EVERYONE!

[Anonymous Coward]

Linus Torwalds: "240k should be enough for everyone."

Re:PF

[Anonymous Coward]

and you sir, are a hell bound hereitc! Turn or burn.

REDUNDANT AND SLOWER THAN KERNEL.ORG

[Anonymous Coward]

250Mbit/sec, not counting the country mirrors, for 30MB files will beat BT senseless anyday.

+1, SOMEBODY ACTUALLY USES UMSDOS

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats definitely informative.

Re:+1, SOMEBODY ACTUALLY USES UMSDOS

[SharpFang]

I use it.

I got tired of seeing "changing permissions of (somefile): Operation not permitted" and installed it for all 'doze partitions.

Re:+1, SOMEBODY ACTUALLY USES UMSDOS

[brank]

Do you mean you're using it instead of vfat? If so, you may find these options useful:

• quiet (no permissions messages)
• unhide (show dos hidden files)
• showexec (show files that dos/win would think are executable as such instead of through umask, only in -ac I think) option useful

Simple question

[Anonymous Coward]

Two weeks ago I paid SCO compliance fee for the 2.4 kernel. If I download and use the new edition, would that entail another $699, would it be free, or is there some upgrade fee somewhere in the middle?

Re:Simple question

[Anonymous Coward]

yes, there is a $499.00 upgrade middle ware, make check payable to cash (our chief finance officer)
and send them imeadiatly to po box: here, please include your email adress and the new improved licencse will arive with the sublect header of SUCKER!

thank you for your continued support
SCO
Software that
Can't be
Ours

Re:Simple question

[anthony_philipp]

why did you pay the compliance fee? they cant actually charge you for it.

Re:Simple question

[Anonymous Coward]

-1, didn't get the joke.

TROLL

[MBCook]

This is a troll. Search for the word FIFO in either the changelogs posted, and you won't find anything like this. If I somehow managed to miss something, point it out to me, but this looks like a TROLL.

Sorry guys.

My only problem...

[Dimensio]

I decided to play around with the 2.6.0 tests after the last release (test5). After a bit of effort, I got nearly everything working except for wavetable MIDI support with my SB Live! card. Rather irritating, since it can't seem to create /dev/sequencer properly (and I had it working just fine with the alsa driver module in 2.4.x).

Otheriwse, things run smoothly with occasional bugs (the bttv driver sometimes flakes out under heavy load if I'm not using 'overlay').

Re:My only problem...

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would you want to run any video program in linux in anything alse but overlay? Aside from being able to take captures with raw x11 bittmapped mode, I don't see a point since overlay is the best performing.

Re:My only problem...

[Dimensio]

Why would you want to run any video program in linux in anything alse but overlay?

Well, normally I don't but motv defaults to grabdisplay and switches back to it when I change channels. Also, overlay doesn't completely fill the screen at 1280x1024 when I switch to fullscreen mode, grabdisplay does.

Synchronous and Connection Oriented physical link

[Anonymous Coward]

SCO is the Synchronous and Connection Oriented physical link which transports voice across a Bluetooth link.

Source

Far future of Linux

[borius]

Does anyone know what Linus' long-term plans are? I mean, it'll probably be 2-3 years before 2.8 comes out, but then what? What is Linux going to look like in 10 or 20 years? Boggles the mind, eh?

Re:Far future of Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

In ten years...

You are probably referring to SCO OS 2013 Server.

ARM Support

[riptalon]

Until recently this would all have been fine but now I have my new Sharp Zaurus SL-C760 I am actually concerned about other architectures appart from x86 ;-) At the moment for just generic ARM support in 2.4 you need a large patch from Russell King and then more patches for the Zaurus specific stuff. The last rmk patch was a month and a half ago for 2.6.0-test2 and as far as I know, no one is even working on porting the Zaurus specific stuff to 2.6.

I don't really know what the arguements are for the present development model where most of the non-x86 architectures are kept separate from the mainline development but I really don't see how it can be a good idea. I guess I don't see what the difference is between individual subsystems, for instance, and support for different architectures. In both cases individuals or teams work on their own but in the subsystem case everything gets merged back in, by the time the kernel it declared stable, whereas for non-x86 architectures this never happens.

It seems to me that given the large size of these architecture patches, their maintainers must spend most of their time just updating them to keep them in sync with the new kernel versions, rather than actually fixing bug or adding new features. Also the fact that ARM users cannot test the latest kernels because there are no rmk patches for them can only lead to a "negative feedback" situation which will hurt kernel development. In general anything that unnecessarily fragments kernel development cannot be a positive thing.

Re:ARM Support

[yarbo]

maybe 2.6-test2 didn't get enough feedback for the developers to work on porting test 3-5?

Re:ARM Support

[Chops]

FWIW, the discussion of (lack of) ARM merging in 2.6 can be found (in summarized form) here. Linus is quoted therein:

I don't think it's a failure. Why _should_ one tree have to try to make everybody happy? We want to try to make it easier to keep the couplings in place by striving for portable infrastructure etc, but we would only be hampered by a philosophy that says "everything has to work in tree X", since that just means that you can't afford to break things.

I'd much rather keep the freedom to break stuff, and have many separate trees that break _different_ things, and let them all co-exist in a friendly rivalry.

And my tree is just one tree in that forest.

So it's not a bug - it's a FEATURE!

Linux 2.6 maintainer at SCALE

[irabinovitch]

Andrew Morton, who will be maintaining the Linux 2.6 kernel, will be speaking at SCALE 2x Other 2.6 developers include William Irwin, and Patrick Mochel.

Re:2.6 (correctly formatted, ignore previous)

[Overly Critical Guy]

Think about it. They've continually pushed back the release date of Longhorn, at least three times now, to my recollection.

They've never even announced a date for Longhorn. What on earth are you talking about?

The screenshots they have leaked out, whether they are true or not haven't produced any vote of confidence from the various geeks I've seen comment about it online.

As if that matters. Those are early, early alpha shots, as we all know. All the cool builds with the 3D acceleration are in a different Microsoft lab anyway that hasn't had one of their builds leaked.

I'm neither defending Microsoft or trying to put them down, but the fact remains that their competition has been given a lot of breathing room, which I think if used wisely, will show some very large rewards by the time Longhorn comes out in full force.

I'm not really sure what breathing room you're talking about. The developer preview of Longhorn is coming out later this year. The list of features Longhorn already boasts is staggering, and I doubt within two years that ANY Linux projects will come close. We'll still be stucking using X11 with a hacked on desktop simulator, business as usual.

Who will upgrade to an OS that curtails choices in the file system?

Again, what the heck are you talking about? Curtails choices in the file system? I assume you're referring to the WinFS service, which just runs in the background and allows you to search metadata through all the gigabytes of data hard drives will contain in 2005.

Who will spend the money on an OS that hasn't proven itself yet?

People spend money on all kinds of new products and operating systems. I'm not sure what unique point you're trying to make here.

I'm not talking about Windows itself, but the new Longhorn.

That is Windows.

As for Longhorn, the "early adopters" might give it a try, but it will still take quite some time before the mass market checks it out. I predict it will be at least 6 months time before Longhorn starts to make any real significant headway in the market.

What are you, a pseudo market analysist? What data and evidence makes you "predict" six months? Longhorn will be a very, very significant upgrade, as drastic as the change from Windows 3.1 to 95, which was a hugely successful release. Expect more of the same. From reading up on the features of Longhorn, this thing is gonna blow people away, from user experience to functionality. There are tons of reasons to switch to this version, unlike XP, whose advantages, though effective, were few.

So, given that I'm being optimistic with a date of January 1st, 2005, I really believe that the alternative OS's will have at least two full years before being in any danger from the MS Marketing Machine.

And like I said, I doubt two years will produce any significant competition. Two years ago we were all expecting Microsoft to topple. And two years before that. It's always the same touted party line, but before Linux makes any headway in that department, it needs actual results (instead of, say, another windowing toolkit or arcane project name).

Re:Have they fixed the file dialog yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

C'mon, this is funny! Some people...

Evolution...

[SharpFang]

There's no real sense to make 10 years plans, when you have no idea what hardware will be available then, what will people need, what do they require. Most of GNU software follows the evolution system. Submit a "bug" to Mozilla, submit a patch, get it revieved and it will be included only if people won't decide it's generally a Bad Idea and ditch it. Similar with kernel - think of a wise feature, create a module, submit it, and maybe in a month after you first thought of it, people will be downloading it from ftp.kernel.org - if your idea was really good. Nobody knows the future and there are no specific plans... except to make things better - more stable, more compilant, more effective, more whatever... Maybe in 20 years ix86 will be completely abandonned and Linux mainstream will move to some new hardware (quantum computers?), maybe in 10 years Linux will become the leading platform in graphics and Kernel will require better gfx handling procedures, maybe someone gets enough balls and brains to integrate X with Kernel in some intelligent way. And maybe Linux will get forgotten, like nowadays VAXen are, replaced by something better? Maybe Microsoft will abandon its old kernels and build its new OS on top of Linux kernel? Nobody knows. What we know is, that as long as at least one nerd on this planet breathes, Linux will be developed and made better :)

Which is all fine and dandy...

[Kjella]

This is why the wise man continued to use 2.2 while the "stable" 2.4 was corrupting IDE partitions, until 2.4.2x finally calmed things down. This is why the wise man will continue to use 2.4.2x until 2.6.2x gets all of the killer bugs out -- the ones that should have gotten out before a "stable" release was even rolled.

...if you don't need any of the 2.4.x (and now 2.6.x) features. Why break something that works. So the development isn't perfect, the "stable" versions aren't perfect. Just don't pretend that any other stable release from e.g. Microsoft is that much more stable either, I've had my share of bluescreens and wrecked files from that end too.

Stuff breaks. Shit happens... And if you wait too long, depreceated versions will bite you too. While I wouldn't put it on a production box, I wouldn't have any problems with putting it on a hobby box.

Kjella

Re:Which is all fine and dandy...

[Frit Mock]

Wise man say: Never touch a running system.

But that's a total different story ...

Here we are talking about some new things, i.e. _not_ running things, but things that we _want_ to be running some day.

You wouldn't even run Linux at all, if nobody ever considered testing and using new releases ...

No Wonder "They" Are Afraid

[EzInKy]

IBM, SGI, INTEL, HP, Navy, Redhat, SUSE, Debian, and boatloads of other patches contributed by other companies, educational institutions, and independent devolopers working together for the profit of all.

Re:Have they fixed the file dialog yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

What are you talking about?

The file dialog was fixed in Linux 9.0 a couple of months ago.

Knoppix with 2.6.0-testX??

[bstadil]

We need Knoppix or a derivative with the latest test kernel,

That way we can get a whole lot more testing done with very little disruption on nornal system?

I tried to make one but I couldn't get it to boot, so maybe someone better qualified can try and if successful post Torrent file.

Re:Knoppix with 2.6.0-testX??

[op00to]

You can have more than one kernel on your system.

Re:Knoppix with 2.6.0-testX??

[Webmonger]

Yes, but with Knoppix, it's really easy to use the distro without even touching the hard disks.

Re:Knoppix with 2.6.0-testX??

[Rich0]

You'd lose the fancy splashscreen. Apparently they've been messing with the framebuffer code substantially between versions and so the folks who have made the splashscreen kernel patches aren't porting them to 2.6 until it settles down.

Re:Knoppix with 2.6.0-testX??

[drfreak]

Yes, I have been waiting for this too. Apparently, the cloop filesystem needs to be ported to the new driver module API in 2.6. I've been considering moving everything over to cramfs for my Knoppix variant project, but haven't had much success yet, and haven't spent much time on it. If 2.6 isn't ready by the end of fall semester (and/or there still isn't a cloopfs port), I just might hack more on a cramfs Knoppix.

Re:nice progress

[SharpFang]

Mozilla has something like 40.000 unresolved bugs. But in the other hand, they consider everything a bug: A broken coffee engine on 2nd floor of Netscape building, a party held on some major release, some website admins being idiots who need to be evangelised or lack of kitchen sink in the browser.

Hmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

There's already kernel/drivers/char/stallion.o for quite some time.
When the hell will a kernel include a mare.o for us heterosexual geeks?

ATI drivers

[warrior]

Has anyone been able to get the ATI fglrx drivers to build with a 2.6-test kernel? That's the only thing stopping me from using it, I've been drooling over the CPU throttling and other ACPI features for some time now, but I can't do w/o my crazy-fast OpenGL either!

Torn,
Mike

Re:ATI drivers

[thre5her]

ver 3.2.5 works perfectly for me!

Re:ATI drivers

[Higman]

I believe the ATI drivers in the 2.6.x kernel are up to date, so you don't need separate drivers anymore.

At least I didn't.

Re:ATI drivers

[TheCrazyFinn]

He's referring to the XFree86 Drivers.

Re:ATI drivers

[Anonymous Coward]

The drivers from the offical ATI site
contain a 2.6 directory, I tried to
make the 2.6 drivers with 2.6.0-test5-mm4
but the make script borked.
Maybe it works with one of them.
The drivers still work but no DRI without the
fglx module :(

LOL IM HUNGRY

[Anonymous Coward]

TIME TO GET A TACO. BBL

There is no bandwidth/dollar exchange rate.

[Anonymous Coward]

Its not like we can redeem the bandwidth for $$. kernel.org is probably plugged into some backbone at a friendly ISP and costs essentially nothing to run.

That relatively guaranteed 250Mbit access to the source is not something I'd easily give up.

News?

[TeknoHog]

News for obsessive-compulsive upgraders. Stuff that antimatters.

NEW 2 J00NIX

[Anonymous Coward]

WHEERE IS MY BREEIFCASE ICON?

Re:One more step...

[MighMoS]

I think having ALSA built in would be a big push for the desktop. One more thing we have down.

Would you like some tacosnot with that?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re:nice progress

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey! That kitchen sink one got fixed!

Re:2.6 (correctly formatted, ignore previous)

[windex82]

Longhorn will be a very, very significant upgrade, as drastic as the change from Windows 3.1 to 95

Kinda like how /every other/ windows release was significant right?

Re:2.6 (correctly formatted, ignore previous)

[technix4beos]

I'll go through your questions one by one...

>> They've never even announced a date for Longhorn. What on earth are you talking about?

I quote from one of their Press Pass documents they have online at microsoft.com:

"Over the course of 2004 you'll see a couple of releases in the betas for "Longhorn" and we'll see that coming to market in 2005.

Now, I'm sure that many of you have heard about or wonder about the possibility of whether we're going to do something before "Longhorn," is there an interim release, and that's something that I don't expect us to do. Currently we have some additional releases that are coming out as follow-ons to the XP Media Center Edition and the Tablet PC Edition so we've got some great advances and fit and finish and addressing additional international marketplaces with new handwriting recognition, new guide data for Europe for the Media Center and so on.

So you'll see some good incremental moves there but really the weight of the company, the weight of all the people in the Windows client division and across the platform's division, the weight of that effort that we're doing is around "Longhorn" and that's what we're focused on and we hope to get you all really pulling the same way so we can come out with a huge wave of excitement for the industry when "Longhorn" ships in 2005."

(quotes and italics mine.)

Several online sources have credited varying target dates for Longhorn, but all generally agree that 2005 will be the earliest that it will be available to the mass market:
Longhorn Betas in 2004, GA in 2005 (ENT News)
Analyst Pegs Longhorn Release at 2006 (ENT News)
Microsoft Pushes Back 'Longhorn' Release (Open Tech Support)
A Longhorn Delay? Not Quite (WinInfo)
Microsoft announces Longhorn release date (CNet News.com)
(I have no affiliation with these sources.)

Microsoft themselves show that 2005 is the target date of Longhorn in a slide picture. (png image)

>> As if that matters. Those are early, early alpha shots, as we all know. All the cool builds with the 3D acceleration are in a different Microsoft lab anyway that hasn't had one of their builds leaked.

First, can you prove there are "cool builds" that will have 100% of the suggested features in a shipping version of Longhorn? Secondly, the history of Microsoft's software release stategy has been plainly made clear numerous times. Hype, Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt, Buzzwords-o'-the-day, Gross Appropriation (oh sorry, I mean Innovation), and just downright unfullfilled expectations litter the computer timescape.

For a company that has been in the software business of well over 25 years, one would think that with their talk of innovation and "exciting new time-saving" features, we would all have an operating system on our machines that used voice controlled openGL hyper speed interfaces, smart enough to do your work for you while you browsed sites like slashdot. Isn't the entire point of using a computer to save time and be more productive? This sadly is not the case today .

>> I'm not really sure what breathing room you're talking about. The developer preview of Longhorn is coming out later this year. The list of features Longhorn already boasts is staggering, and I doubt within two years that ANY Linux projects will come close. We'll still be stucking using X11 with a hacked on desktop simulator, business as usual.

P4 Emergency Edition

[chargen]

I forget where I saw it, but they were referring to the P4 "Extreme Edition" as the P4 "Emergency Edition". That cracked me up.

Oh Intel...

-Pete

EVERYONE I looked at was a BUG fix!

[Anonymous Coward]

240 KB of changes? How about of "bug fixes"? EVERYONE I looked at was a BUG fix!

.

*scratches head*

[Anonymous Coward]

With Grsecurity, you can put Apache to chroot and feel protected against buffer overflows and chroot breakage.

Re:*scratches head*

[kangasloth]

At it's heart, chroot just changes a process's view of the filesystem. There are still plenty of ways to interfere with the system from inside a chroot jail. I've never used grsecurity, but from the website it's clear that they have substantially improved the feature, i.e. now apache won't be able to break out of that jail.

ACPI IRQ Lockups (was: Re: Lockups)

[narfbot]

For those who experience lockups at boot when ACPI is used for irq assignments and have to use "pci=noacpi" or "acpi=off" then try this patch:

http://www.chez.com/alors/acpi_pci_irq_routing_f ix 2.patch.gz
(copy and paste link)

This is an updated version of a patch that was just posted yesterday on the lkml something like "[PATCH] ACPI PCI irq routing". It hasn't made into test6 so I tried the patch and test6 together and seem to have fixed my problem. I don't know if it will fix all yall problems but... worth a try.

what about '2.6 switching why and when'?

[axxackall]

Now I can understand how to switch to 2.6. next two questions to answer befor to do in on the production: why and when. I mean, what are the major reasons for me to switch my systems (servers and desktops) to 2.6. As for "when" I guess it's when a level of instability of fresh baken code will be compensated by just listed reasons to switch.

So, what are (at least three) major reasons to switch from 2.4 to 2.6? Of course besides "trying the new kernel" (is there anything I can notice without being ponted at it before?) and "running the application XYZ specially written for 2.6" (are there any such things already?).

Re:what about '2.6 switching why and when'?

[Creepy Crawler]

I'll give you 3 good reasons why 2.6 is a "bit" better than 2.4

1: NSA security patches included into kernel as "Alternate security system"

2: Default sound system of ALSA

3: SMB-Unix extensions for the new CIFS, allows you to remotely mount /dev/ from another computer

I look at Linux as this for a secure system. Take a beefy machine and put UML on it. Now, use NSA security patches on every UML sub-machine. Have all of those /dev mounted to the real machine by way of SMB-Unix extension and USB rootplug on the master.

In effect, you have to be sitting at the console, with your usb key, and then take root on those sub-machines on your UML network.

Can anyone say ouch? Put those black-hat's in their place.

Re:what about '2.6 switching why and when'?

[axxackall]

1. Does it include RBAC (Role-based Access control)?

2. in 2.4 ALSA worked only on 40% boxes for me (60% among x86). I am looking forward to have ALSA on PPC.

3. Are you saying it will be different (more general?) than CONFIG_BLK_DEV_NBD (Network block device support), which is already in 2.4?

Although I am not sure I understand you further example. But thanks anyway - I already see 4 different reasons to try it on production systems (adding the responsivity of desktops answered in another comment).

Re:what about '2.6 switching why and when'?

[Creepy Crawler]

1: Sure does. Has another rule set also, but the 2.6.0test4 didnt have help associated to it. I believe it was MDAC, but there's no configuration for it yet.

2: I'm too poor to afford any decent PPC box. However, ALSA seemed to work on most of my boxes. Only garbage cards like the Aureal series dont work. And I dont fel bad about them either....

3: Yep. Instead of having to deal with network block suppport, you just mount as a -T CIFS . It sees that you're trying to mount /dev nodes, and allows you to have the appropiate controls.

Boring SCO References

[dryan]

Hmm i think i have counted an average of 2419 SCO jokes per story. Everyone is so incredibly original.

Re:Boring SCO References

[Anonymous Coward]

Make that 2420.

Important, Mousepad on laptops now work in 2.6

[peripatetic_bum]

I have been working on getting the HP pavilion ze5385us working and the 2.6 test kernel up until now did not have the synaptics touch stuff working.
Now they do

see my site mung.net for more details on getting linux (debian esp) to work on the laptop

AND

here is a link to the site that provides binarys and source to get teh synaptics mousepad to work (this mousepa is found on most recent laptops). this is the documentation from the kernel

Say Y here if you have a Synaptics TouchPad connected to your system. This touchpad is found on many modern laptop computers.

Note that you also need a user space driver to interpret the data generated by the kernel. A compatible driver for XFree86 is available from http://w1.894.telia.com/~u89404340/touchpad/index. html

Re:Important, Mousepad on laptops now work in 2.6

[tunah]

Um, touchpad has always worked, to my knowledge, in 2.6 - starting from test2 or 3 (i forget) it didn't work using the generic PS/2 driver and many people thought it was broken, but I think it always worked in some form...

A more responsive desktop

[Goonie]

The one thing desktop users will notice is that 2.6 makes for a noticeably snappier, more responsive desktop.

Don't Forget OEMs

[Anonymous Coward]

I would agree that uptake of Longhorn would otherwise be slow except for OEMs. I believe PC builders will fall all over themselves to offer Longorn, and, hey, when you buy a new PC, you gotta have the newest OS, right?

Re:2.6 (correctly formatted, ignore previous)

[Narchie Troll]

Oh, for fuck's sake.

Every Windows release has been grossly overhyped and called "revolutionary." Before WinXP came out, I heard people saying the same goddamn thing: "WinXP will be as big a change as Win95 was from 3.1!" It wasn't. It simply wasn't a major improvement or change from currently existing software.

I don't blame Microsoft for this. All successful companies overhype their products; look what happened to OS/2 when IBM basically sat on it.

I don't see any point in being polite here. You're swallowing the entire load. You're a fucking cockchoker, just as bad as the "l00nix!!! penguin power" fucknuts and the frothing Apple zealots.

OS zealotry is refusing to see limitations. Linux zealots say "WITH WINEX YOU CAN NOW ALMOST PLAY MORROWWIND AND IT ONLY CRASHES EVERY 2 MINUTES!!!" Apple zealots say "OS X IS UNIX BASED AND THE MOST POWERFUL OS EVER AND THE G5 IS THE FASTEST COMPUTER EVER AND STEVE JOBS IS HUNG LIKE A HORSE!!!" And Microsoft zealots say "THE NEW WINDOWS RELEASE WILL IMPROVE EVERYONE'S LIFE AND CURE CANCER!!! JUST LIKE .NET!!" Fucking morons, every one.

MODERATORS: The parent post is a troll

[Sara Chan]

Moderators, the parent post (7079404) is a troll. You can check this by looking at the changelog: the text quoted by the troll doesn't exist--it is just made up.

MODERATORS: the parent post is off a troll

[Sara Chan]

Moderators, the quote given in the parent post (7079924)does not exist. Please check the changelog (linked in the story) and see for yourself. The quote is a troll, made up by the grandparent post. The parent and grandparent should be modded down.

Re:MODERATORS: the parent post is off a troll

[devphil]

Thank you for telling me. (Although my point about the stability of the Linux kernels stands.)

Software-mode SIMD commands?

[Short Circuit]

Perl 6 is going to have commands that take advantage of SIMD and SMP processing.

Could Linux add a software-mode SIMD command that takes arbitrary amounts of data?

That would scale very well to Hyper-Threading, SMP, clusters and quantum computers.

Just a thought...

Re:nice progress

[Anonymous Coward]

The KDE project is vastly larger than the Linux project.

Re:2.6 (correctly formatted, ignore previous)

[Anonymous Coward]

See, if you actually had a brain and knew something about the history of computing, you'd know that the taskbar was a complete rip off of RISC OS' panel. Oooh, a little rectangle which displays running apps, has a clock and 'main menu'? Been there, done that AGES before Win95 was even considered.

Grow up, prick.

Re:upgrade Longhorn

[IchBinEinPenguin]

(secures AFDB firmly on head)

What makes you thing you'll have a choice by 2005 about upgrading Windows?

Between licensing, EOL-ing, DRM-disabled hardware, selectivley providing security patches and buying laws that will brand you a terrorist if you don't upgrade I suspect more people be using longhorn than you think.

For one.... every new computer purchased. Think about it, not that they're no longer supproting 2 streams of OS (9x and NT) how much easier is it going to be to pull the plug on XP (or whatever) when the time comes to 'encourage' people to upgrade?

Want that new 3D graphics card? Sorry, the only digitally signed DHS-approved certified terrorist-free MPAA-approved drivers available are for longhorn!

Here's hoping I'm wrong.........

Re:Billabong Sing-Along !

[Anonymous Coward]

Take off all Zig, for great justice!

2.4 and 2.6 can coexist peacefully

[LordMcD]

Breakage is not necessary. 2.4 will happily fail to mount /sys as sysfs, and it doesn't even look at /etc/modprobe.conf. The sysinit changes can be solved with a tiny bit of shell scripting. Move /etc/rc.sysinit to /etc/rc.sysinit.24 and /etc/rc.sysinit.26, and make your changes in the latter. Then create a new /etc/rc.sysinit with the following:

#!/bin/bash

KERNEL=$(uname -r | awk -F. '{print $1"."$2}')

if [ $KERNEL = "2.6" ]; then
. /etc/rc.sysinit.26
else
. /etc/rc.sysinit.24
fi

Re:2.6 (correctly formatted, ignore previous)

[Overly Critical Guy]

Oh, for fuck's sake.

Every Windows release has been grossly overhyped and called "revolutionary." Before WinXP came out, I heard people saying the same goddamn thing: "WinXP will be as big a change as Win95 was from 3.1!" It wasn't. It simply wasn't a major improvement or change from currently existing software.

Completely and utterly wrong.

Windows XP was intended to get home users off of the DOS kernel and onto the NT kernel. It was as big a change--if not bigger--than the move from Windows 3.1 to 95. Just because it wasn't a visual change doesn't mean it wasn't a technological one.

I don't see any point in being polite here. You're swallowing the entire load. You're a fucking cockchoker, just as bad as the "l00nix!!! penguin power" fucknuts and the frothing Apple zealots.

You seem to have some chip on your shoulder toward me simply because I point out the obvious truth that new versions of products offer improvements over their old ones. Longhorn will be a major improvement. Read up on it.

OS zealotry is refusing to see limitations.

When did I say Windows didn't have limitations?

Linux zealots say "WITH WINEX YOU CAN NOW ALMOST PLAY MORROWWIND AND IT ONLY CRASHES EVERY 2 MINUTES!!!" Apple zealots say "OS X IS UNIX BASED AND THE MOST POWERFUL OS EVER AND THE G5 IS THE FASTEST COMPUTER EVER AND STEVE JOBS IS HUNG LIKE A HORSE!!!" And Microsoft zealots say "THE NEW WINDOWS RELEASE WILL IMPROVE EVERYONE'S LIFE AND CURE CANCER!!! JUST LIKE .NET!!" Fucking morons, every one.

I know you're trying to play it tough and cool with the mocking overuse of caps and gratuitious profanity, but it really makes you come off as a lame idiot.

Next.

Re:2.6 (correctly formatted, ignore previous)

[Overly Critical Guy]

Been there, done that AGES before Win95 was even considered.

Yep. It was called Windows 1.0. Oops.

Next.

old news?

[dnotj]

This is a sig test.