Slashdot Mirror
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.
1st?
Hi Everyone!
Really.
...towards the winning over the desktop!
just checked out there bug database, and for an alpha it is pretty low, below 500 bugs. tell that to the kde guyes. last time i checked there they had about 5000.
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...
Or do i have to wait for 3.0?
- 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!UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
Don't generally buy Linux before Service Pack 2 comes out.
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
I used to work as a consultant for a Fortune 500 company (more than 10,000 employees). As an expert in the field of IT consulting, I think I can shed a little light on the current climate of the open source community, and Linux in particular. The main reason that open source software, and Linux in particular, is failing is due to the underlying immaturity of the technology and the perception of the viral GNU license.
.NET Framework at the kernel level. I didn't use C, because contrary to popular belief, ASP and VB can go just as low level as C can, and the latest .NET VB compiler produces code that is more portable and faster than C. I took it upon myself to configure and compile all of the necessary shareware versions of software that we needed, including sendmail, apache, and BIND. I even used the latest version of gcc (3.1) to increase the execution time of the binaries. After a long chain of events, the results of the system were less than impressive..
I know that the above statements are strong, but I have hard facts to back it up with. At the Fortune 500 company that I worked for, we wanted to leverage the power of Linux and associated open source technologies to benefit our server pool. The perception that Linux is "free" was too much to ignore. I recommended to the company that we use the newest version of Linux, version 9.0. My expectations were high that it would outperform our current solution at the time, Windows2000, which was doing an absolutely superb job (and still is!) serving as web, DNS, and FTP servers.
I felt that I was up to the job to convert the entire server pool to the Linux technology. I had several years experience programming VB, C#, ASP, and
The first bombshell to hit my project was that my client found out from another consultant that the GNU community has close ties to former communist leaders. Furthermore, he found out that the 'x' in Linux was a tribute to the former Communist philosopher, Karl Marx, whose name also ends in 'x'. The next bombshell to hit my project was the absolutely horrible performance. I knew from the beginning that Linux wasn't ready for the desktop, but I had always been told by my colleagues that it was better suited for a "server". As soon as I replaced all of the Windows2000 servers with Linux servers, the Linux servers immediately went into swap. Furthermore, almost all of the machines were quad-processor x86 servers. We had no idea that Linux had such awful SMP support. After less than 1 day in service, I was constantly having to restart servers, because for some reason, many of the servers were experiencing kernel panics caused by mod_perl crashing apache! The hardship did not end there! Apparently, the version of BIND installed on the server pool was remotely exploitable. Soon after we found that out, a new worm was remotely infecting all of our servers! We were not expecting this, because our IIS servers running on Windows2000 had never experienced a worm attack. Microsoft has always provided us with patches in the unlikely event that an exploit was found. It took us hundreds of man-hours just to disinfect our Linux servers! After just 48 hours of operating Linux servers in our server pool, we had exhausted our budget for the entire year! It was costing us approximately 75% more to run Linux than Windows2000.
Needless to say, I will not be recommending Linux to any of my Fortune 500 clients. In the beginning, we thought that since Linux was such "old" technology, it would be more mature than anything on the market. We also found out the hard way that rag-tag volunteer efforts responsible for Apache and BIND simply are not able to compete with the professional operations of Microsoft. I guess the old saying is true; "You get what you pay for!" Needless to say, I will be using Microsoft's "shared license" solution for my enterprise clients, rather than the communist GNU license.
As it stands now, I do believe Linux has some practical uses. I think it will be useful in a University setting for first year computer science students to compile their "Hello World!" programs on (provided that gcc won't kernel panic the machine). Simply put, Linux just doesn't handle the rigors of a real-world work environment.
I expect Arjan to have updated Red Hat packages soon at http://people.redhat.com/arjanv/2.5/
p age=kernel for the information for making these kernels work on RHL.
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&
Should be a good one to try if you've not used any 2.6.0-test releases yet.
The torrent for the new kernel: click me!
Well! Duh!
Tie's are far off because they have TWO engines!
Twin Ion Engines!
Biatcheez
of undocumented, untracked, buggy stuff?
376. Support for fifos has been temporarily been removed.
Adds nothing, and although I didn't notice a difference in speed, I wouldn't bother with it.
I have over 70 freaks, do you?
Will this be put in the cooker?
i.e. the unnecessary blank spaces and newline charaters.
New year Resolution: Don't change sig this year
[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.
WTF are you talking about? File dialog? In the kernel?
"Der, I'm retarded" -- YOU
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?
No, you don't need to be using Gentoo.
In A.D. 2101
War was beginning
Um, why do you mod the parent up without checking the (obviously wrong) facts? YHBT, HAND.
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.
I'm not joking - look for yourself.
What does this mean?
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.
;(, 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.
At home though I'm stuck with debian unstable which still uses kernel 2.2.26
Ts,ts,... Another desperate try to promote Linux. Folks, wait for 2.7, the one which is scheduled to be written by the kernels themselves. Linux takes time to make it like Windows. Ohhh, I miss those excellent days of the 0.0... version where guys were not sure where they would be ripping code from -ahhh.
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*
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.
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...
All generalizations are false
Time for me to plug the mirror I'm affiliated with...
Wuarchive's kernel.org mirror
Is 2.6 really so good without Tux kernel-based webserver and GrSecurity?
I for one welcome our new changelog wielding overlords
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...
I'm preparing an end-user 2.6 switching howto here Pass the word.
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.
YHL. HAFND.
Linus Torwalds: "240k should be enough for everyone."
and you sir, are a hell bound hereitc! Turn or burn.
250Mbit/sec, not counting the country mirrors, for 30MB files will beat BT senseless anyday.
Thats definitely informative.
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?
Sorry guys.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
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').
STOP MISUSING APOSTROPHES, YOU MORONS!!!
SCO is the Synchronous and Connection Oriented physical link which transports voice across a Bluetooth link.
Source
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?
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.
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.
nibble nibble munchkin. the M$FT is so big yes. it controls, controls all. the people they walk by i see their feet though my window. their feet swing by the bars on my window. pretty feet shiny shoes. swish swish. are they going to work? i WILL NOT go to work. M$FT is at work. M$FT controls the pretty feet people. controls their money their futures.
...2.6!!!!!!!!! the M$FT it fears the linux. spreads lies. says the linux comes with no warranty. THE WARRANTY IT IS BAD! it goes into your pores. steals your power. the kernel is good. the kernel will rise and slay the M$FT. when the itching comes i think about the linux. it helps.
i sit and rebuld my kernel. my CPU thrums. the kernel it is the key. we hack the linux yes good. 2.3, 2.4, 2.5,
i hack a driver for my dvd-rom. it does not work. i debug. it does not work. i delete the old source. and start again. i recompile. it does not work. on M$FT the dvd-rom is plug and play. that is how they get you. get behind your eyes. start the itching. so i hack the driver. i hack, we hack: we gnaw. gnaw at the ropes of slavery. the ropes of M$FT. pretty feet people, we will save you.
the itching comes...
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).
"Sufferin' succotash."
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 :)
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
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
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
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.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
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.
Help fight continental drift.
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?
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
Intel transfer the difficult from Hadware to software, for get more power, programmer need more technology. -- chinaitn
TIME TO GET A TACO. BBL
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 for obsessive-compulsive upgraders. Stuff that antimatters.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
WHEERE IS MY BREEIFCASE ICON?
Longhorn will be a very, very significant upgrade, as drastic as the change from Windows 3.1 to 95
/every other/ windows release was significant right?
Kinda like how
>> 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.
user@host$ diff
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
240 KB of changes? How about of "bug fixes"? EVERYONE I looked at was a BUG fix!
.
With Grsecurity, you can put Apache to chroot and feel protected against buffer overflows and chroot breakage.
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:
f ix 2.patch.gz
http://www.chez.com/alors/acpi_pci_irq_routing_
(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.
Microsoft themselves show that 2005 is the target date of Longhorn in a slide picture.
.
That's not a release date. That's a target year. Complete difference.
First, can you prove there are "cool builds" that will have 100% of the suggested features in a shipping version of Longhorn?
Of course not, because I didn't say "100% of the suggested features in a shipping version of Longhorn." If there was a build like that, it'd be gold and they'd be selling it. You're putting words in my mouth.
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.
What does that have to do with this discussion? 2005 is the target year of Longhorn. It was originally late 2004 but has been pushed to 2005. That's it.
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.
Oh, stop. There have been plenty of time-saving features, from the taskbar (which everyone now rips off as though it's always been a standard OS feature) to the redesigned Start menu (I don't care what you might say, it saves time for me to not have to go to the desktop to get to My Computer or My Network Places), to much more. They have done a TON of innovation. For you to ignore that with some facetious comment that dismisses it all tells me you have some sort of chip on your shoulder, despite your claims about not wanting to "put down Microsoft."
Isn't the entire point of using a computer to save time and be more productive? This sadly is not the case today
That's the whole point of things like WinFS, the upcoming Aero interface, and so forth. Again, what is your point? Are you saying Longhorn won't be productive or save time? I'm confused as to what you're responding to.
I never mentioned or targetted developers in my original posting.
That wasn't the point. You were acting as though Longhorn is vaporware that is continuously pushed away year by year, when Microsoft is already unrolling the developer preview for companies to begin porting and compatibility testing. My point was that they're already on schedule and pushing full steam ahead.
I was focusing on the end user, Mr. Joe User, who up till now has been fed the party line from Microsoft that they know what is best for him, and why doesn't he just forget about this whole linux/schminux business anyways... I mean really, Microsoft knows best, right?
You're really sounding goofy. "Party line?" You are aware of the Linux community and its party line, aren't you? Again, I'm not sure what your point is here. I don't care about Microsoft marketing. There is nothing wrong with announcing the next version of your product as an improvement, which all versions of Windows have been except for ME. What does this have to do with Longhorn? You're just bitching about Microsoft now.
My original point was to point out that those working to provide a better alternative to windows have been given a fantastic gift, for free and without prompting, a gift of valuable time to help develop something that Mr. Joe User might be able to use in the next couple of years.
And my point was to crush that ill-informed assertation. Two years won't be long enough. The developer preview is already coming out. There is no "gift of valuable time" because Longhorn is already being pushed.
I never once made an assertion that Linux would be the be-all-and-end-all for the desktop. I just want to h
"Sufferin' succotash."
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?).
Less is more !
Hmm i think i have counted an average of 2419 SCO jokes per story. Everyone is so incredibly original.
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
Sigs are dangerous coy things
The one thing desktop users will notice is that 2.6 makes for a noticeably snappier, more responsive desktop.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
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?
Sco jokes count you !!!
Sorry couldn't resist that
Oh, for fuck's sake.
.NET!!" Fucking morons, every one.
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
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 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.
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...
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
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.
(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.........
Oh, for fuck's sake.
.NET!!" Fucking morons, every one.
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
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.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Been there, done that AGES before Win95 was even considered.
Yep. It was called Windows 1.0. Oops.
Next.
"Sufferin' succotash."
This is a sig test.
No more Micro$oft bashing from me. Its like bashing at the special olympics.