Linux 2.6.0 Expected In Mid-December

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux 2.6.0 Expected In Mid-December

Posted by timothy on Tuesday November 25, 2003 @11:30PM from the send-more-penguins dept.

Ridgelift writes "CRN is reporting the release of Linux 2.6.0 in mid-December. 'Torvalds, Linux's lead developer and now an OSDL Fellow, and Linux kernel maintainer Andrew Morton this week released the test10 version of Linux 2.6 after a three-year development effort. A final test11 version is expected before they sign off on the production version next month.' Get ready for 'major scalability improvements, faster performance, enhanced support for embedded systems and, to a lesser extent,' a kernel that 'supplies desktop systems with better USB and FireWire support.'"

16 of 270 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

This isn't unexpected by The+One+KEA · 2003-11-25 23:34 · Score: 4, Interesting

I've been running -testX kernels for a while now and the claims made about all the improvements are true -- 2.6 is a far better kernel than 2.4, IMO.

The prediction that akpm made about mid-December sounds about right as well -- 2.6.0-test10 could be 2.6.0 right now and I doub there'd be any showstoppers to block it.

--
SCREW THE ADS! http://adblock.mozdev.org/ Proud user of teh Fox of Fire - Registered Linux User #289618
1. Re:This isn't unexpected by Ianoo · 2003-11-26 03:00 · Score: 5, Interesting
  The NT and XP kernel are the same. XP's is just an incremental improvement over the NT4 Kernel (it's almost the exact same Kernel in Win2000 aka NT5). Microsoft have just moved things in and out of the Kernel since NT3 to improve performance (such as the full DirectX support added to W2K rather than the awful DirectX emulation in NT4).
  
  Also, while it's true that the 9x series are built on top of DOS, the same as 3.11, there were a significant number of changes to support 32-bit and things like pre-emptive rather than cooperative multitasking. Not quite as many changes as Microsoft would have us believe (it certainly wasn't the 100% new 16-bit-free operating system everyone expected based on what they were saying), but certainly a lot of changes under the hood.
  
  Lastly, 3.x never had a Kernel, it was effectively a big graphical library and program launcher, and not much more.
  
  That given, I'd revise your list to:
  
  DOS Kernel (if you can call it a Kernel!)
  
  9x Kernel (which built on DOS/3x)
  
  NT Kernel (featuring in 2K and XP with tweaks)
  
  I agree entirely that Linux has to be taken in a larger context. Considering that in the same time it's taken to go from 2K to XP we've seen Gnome go from v1 to v2 and KDE go from v2 to v3, which were much more significant changes, I'd say that Linux on the desktop is advancing more rapidly.
  
  Besides, there's no reason to rewrite a Kernel from scratch if you get it right the first time. There don't seem to be that many fundamental problems with the Linux Kernel, so the continued process of tweaking and gradual improvement seems set to continue. Microsoft, on the other hand, had to write a new Kernel because 9x was such a horrendous mess and lacked quite a lot of modern features and elegance.
What the fuck? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-11-25 23:34 · Score: 4, Interesting

Morton acknowledged that the XFS and JFS file systems, which were originally developed under a Unix license and then ported over to Linux, could be a sticky issue that lawyers can exploit. "SGI did develop it. It could be [SCO] has a legitimate case there, not technically, but on the letter of the law," Morton said.
1. Re:What the fuck? by Zapdos · 2003-11-26 01:16 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  They were actually developed on white paper. The first implementation may have been on a UNIX. Both HP and SGI are aware of license agreements and code ownership. All of their programs are fully developed on white paper, patents applied for, granted or pending, then creation of the FIRST implementation. In doing business this way, HP and SGI own the technologies, SCO has no leg to stand on.
  
  --
  Get a free ipod.
good stuff by inode_buddha · 2003-11-25 23:40 · Score: 5, Interesting

I've tried several -test kernels, and the desktop performance boost blows my mind. I could probably stay with -test10 and akpm's patches, but that's not what the kernel team is really looking for (I think). Last I heard, They really want people to hammer on stuff like PnP, scalability, USB, and ACPI.
Any ideas on how much akpm's patches end up becoming "mainstream"? After reading the changelogs (and using the patches), I think it'd be a good idea.

--
C|N>K
1. Re:good stuff by crimsun · 2003-11-26 00:28 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  All of the critical fixes from -mm are pushed into Linus's current tree. Just take a look at the "Merged" section immediately following "Latest Linus tree" here; repeat with the previous -testX-mmY patch announcements.
  
  Now take a look at this under the "Andrew Morton" heading and notice how many of those patch headings ring a bell. Yessir, he has been kickin' arse and taking names.
Re:Linux 2.6: I can only recommend it! by Billly+Gates · 2003-11-25 23:49 · Score: 4, Interesting

Mod this sucker up!

It will save you countless headaches if you read the files about module-init. I have been using the linux kernels since 2.0x but never had an upgrade break a system. It totally ruined my redhat 9 box doing that.

I upgraded to module-init and after that 2.4 wouldn't boot. grr.

Is there a way to have both installed so I could dual boot 2.4 and 2.6?

I switched back to my more upgrade friendly FreeBSD until 2.6 was more stabilized and more distro's supported it. My guess is Gentoo would be the first.

--
http://saveie6.com/
The Best OS Ever! by dimss · 2003-11-26 00:17 · Score: 2, Interesting

Linux 2.6.0-test9 is the best kernel I've ever used. Waiting impatiently for release! Now I don't have any reasons to use BSD :)

JFS still has some issues and no DRI on Radeon 7500. Hope that will be OK soon.
Re:Xmas by contrasutra · 2003-11-26 00:18 · Score: 4, Interesting

It was suppose to be released October 31, so you are right. This sounds about right. 2-3 months behind schedule.

I love 2.6. Ive been using it since -test4 and Ive only had a couple of issues with some of the Morton Patches. Other than that, it IS everything people say it is (on my desktop machine). Fast, stable, and performs amazing under heavy load.

Its the first time I could compile GIMP and surf the web without feeling any slowdown when scrolling.
About Java ... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-11-26 01:07 · Score: 1, Interesting

As Java is lot depending on multithreaded stuff, how do you expect speed to increase becaause of the huge improvements done in the thread handling techniques ?

Is there any need to recompile the application to get benefit of the nex threading technique ? or will all the existing applications benefit from this without "moving a single finger" ?

With Linux 2.6 and the upcoming Java2 1.5, Seatle's institution (the one that cost us a fortune and is not a wheel !) the we will have lot of headache to fight this winning team for the next couple of years on server side !!!!
Re:Xmas by diersing · 2003-11-26 01:25 · Score: 2, Interesting

Although I've not quit my day job to follow the SCO v. IBM thing, am I correct in that SCO has not released the "what & where" as far as the lines of UNIX code in the linux kernel? If not, then won't the 2.6 kernel fall under the settlement agreements (either for or against)? Not that it would prevent me from downloading my favorite distro when released with 2.6, just curious.
2.6 Kernel issues - Is it really ready? by cronot · 2003-11-26 02:01 · Score: 4, Interesting

I've been wanting to run the 2.6 on my Debian-unstable box, but I've been scared off by some of the negative reports I've heard so far. Some of them I've seen on comments from this article.

Most notably (for me) is devfs not being actively supported anymore (being shifted in favor of udev). That's sad, at least for me, because I've been using devfs since the early versions of the 2.4 kernel, it always worked well for me, and from what I've heard about udev so far, devfs seems like a more elegant and mature solution.

Then there are problems with USB devices, and others that, being narrowed down, comes down to problems on the APIC interface. From what I've heard so far, it doesn't look stable, so why ship it on linux 2.6?

There's also this problem with Kernel Preemption. I'm using it on my 2.4, and I don't want to go without it on 2.6. Of course I might just be lucky to no stumble on this problem, but the fact that it can trigger an oops on someone just scares the hell out of me.

Finally, there's a problem I've experienced myself, but didn't care to report at the time. It's quite old by now (I think it was around version 2.5.65~2.5.70). It has to do with software-raid. I've got a RAID-0 array with 3 SCSI Disks (6gb + 2x4gb = ~14Gb). The disks are old, I know, just like the controller (Adaptec AIC-7xxx). But they work just fine on the 2.4 kernel. So, at the time I decided to give 2.5 a try, just to find out that my array wasn't being detected/mounted. Googled around, found some similar reports and some possible workarounds, but none worked, so I switched back to the 2.4 kernel and haven't touched the development kernels since. It might just be resolved by now, I don't know... Anyway, I will soon replace these disks by a couple of IDEs, with no RAIDing, to save some CPU cycles, so this will not be such a big problem.

So, anyone care to give me one (or more) reason s to try 2.6 again?
Any distro with kernel 2.6 and KDE 3.2 yet? by KamuSan · 2003-11-26 02:42 · Score: 2, Interesting

Are there any experimental distros with kernel 2.6 and KDE 3.2 already?
I don't have time to compile everything myself, so it has to be at least a little user friendly ;-)
alsa sound kernel support by HelloKitty · 2003-11-26 03:33 · Score: 5, Interesting

I'm looking forward to the end the nasty OSSFree, and the beginning of the silky smooth default included Alsa sound kernel.
no more annoying upgrading my system to Alsa when I want to make it into a professional audio workstation

--
music - http://www.subatomicglue.com
For Embedded systems, kernel is getting too large by Anonymous Coward · 2003-11-26 03:44 · Score: 1, Interesting

Already I have to make large tricks to get a single 2.4 bootfloppy. With 2.6 that comes down to nearly impossible. If i select an ALL-NO kernel its already 1.3 Mb. I would like to see the kernel downsized to around 500Kb with ALL-NO so I can make a single bootfloppy.

And yes, I still have hardware that has no CDrom and just a network boot. Gentoo is ideal on this installation but I can't get Gentoo on it using a 2.6 bootfloppy.

So basicly, I don't understand what the embedded system guys are on about. The new 2.6 kernel is a spacehog. Embedded systems can of course easily be a P-IV 2Ghz with plenty of ram, but mine is a simple 48Mb memory P-75. It does its job without even working a sweat so I see no reason to upgrade the hardware.

In essence, I have to use at least a heavily modified linux kernel to get my bootfloppy and with 2.6 nearly ready I will see support for 2.2 and 2.4 start to fade.
Re:Linux 2.6: I can only recommend it! by spaceyhackerlady · 2003-11-26 05:35 · Score: 2, Interesting

I upgraded my laptop to 2.6.0-test4 back in September, after reading this article.
The previous kernel (2.4.20, Slackware 9) worked, but had a couple of rough edges. The most serious (particularly on a laptop) was Compaq's weird ACPI implementation that 2.4.20 couldn't figure out. After I booted 2.6.0-test4, I was able to read off all the information I needed. Much easier to use in the field!
In the process of upgrading I did indeed break the 2.4 modutils. But since 2.6 works so well, I really don't care. Some day I'll upgrade X so it uses the ATI Radeon chipset directly, rather than messing around with VESA.
Impressed hell out of my co-workers, too.
...laura, looking forward to 2.6.0