Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux 2.6.0 Expected In Mid-December

Posted by timothy on 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.'"

54 of 270 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Xmas by Libor+Vanek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't even think about getting it this year ;-) Have you ever seen such a large project on schedule? .)

  2. This isn't unexpected by The+One+KEA · · 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 AKnightCowboy · · Score: 2, Funny
      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.

      What's taking so long anyway? I thought Linus's new grand master plan was quicker releases of major versions. 3 years seems like an eternity in the electronic world. In that time Windows has gone from 2000 to XP to 2003 for crying out loud! They're jumping all over the fscking version map and all we have to show for it is a lousy .2 subversion jump? 3 years and .2 versions?? Why not announce it as Linux XP or Linux 2004 or something more exciting?

    2. Re:This isn't unexpected by arodland · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But really, think about it.

      In the past 9-10 years, windows has gone from 3.x to 95 and NT, to 2000, to 2003. In the same time, Linux has gone from 1.0 to (just about) 2.6

      The biggest shift in windows-world was from 3.x to 9x / NT in 1995. Linux went from 1.2.x to 2.0 in 1996. Since then, we've had 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6, all of which have had improvements that would have qualified for major releases in windows.

      Of course, Linux is a kernel, and windows is quite a bit heavier, so it's a case of tangerines and oranges.

    3. Re:This isn't unexpected by nagora · · Score: 2, Funny
      In that time Windows has gone from 2000 to XP to 2003 for crying out loud!

      Oh, yeah, that was a leap alright! New splash screen and a different colour scheme. Whoop-de-do.

      TWW

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
    4. Re:This isn't unexpected by EriDay · · Score: 3, Insightful
      In the last 12 years M$ has really only sold 3 kernels:
      • Win3.0, Win31, Win95, Win98, WinME all built on the DOS kernel.
      • Various versions of the WinNT kernel
      • Various versions of the XP kernel

      There has been some tweaking of the kernel for market positioning and bug fixes, but no other major architectual overhauls. Everything else has been modifications to the window manger which is the equivilent to a new KDE or Gnome version. Let's not forget that M$ is impoverished comared to Linux.
    5. Re:This isn't unexpected by ultranova · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's why we have distributions, which can up the minor and major numbers whenever they like, or call themselves whatever flashy names the marketing people come up with. For example, there's Red Hat Linux (was, at leat), Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Advanced Server (?) and so worth. A newbie is unlikely to know or care about the kernel version anyway...

      On the other hand, calling things by version number is much clearer for anyone who wants to upgrade/modify their system. If you had Linux ME and Linux XP, which one would be better ? On the other hand, if you have Linux 2.4 and Linux 2.6, the choice is pretty obvious.

      BTW. I just have to ask. What kind of IT director decides based on flashy names, and not comparison by technical merit ?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    6. Re:This isn't unexpected by Ianoo · · 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.
    7. Re:This isn't unexpected by sharkey · · Score: 3, Funny
      Oh, yeah, that was a leap alright! New splash screen and a different colour scheme. Whoop-de-do.

      Come on, give a little bit of credit. Starting with XP, you can open .ZIP files without findng, downloading and installing a archiving software application. What other operating system can read compressed file archives right after install?

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    8. Re:This isn't unexpected by spongman · · Score: 3, Informative
      You're correct, right up until you imply that NT was written to replace 9x. NT shipped before win95, and it existed within MS well before win95 was even conceived. win95 was writen because they wanted to ship win32 to customers and NT didn't run as well as OS/2 or Win3.1 on consumer-level machines.

      There was an effort to write a completely new win32-based replacement for win31, cougar was the codename for the 32-bit DOS kernel, and panther was the win32 core, but panther was canned and cougar was merged into chicago (win95).

  3. What the fuck? by Anonymous Coward · · 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 · · 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.
  4. Now you can have those 64 CPUs by cspenn · · Score: 2, Funny

    Now you can have those 64 CPU machines that you've always wanted. Hmm, I wonder if the new kernel will come with any legal exemptions like "Not to be used by any employee or lawyer of SCO"?

    That'd be nice.

    --
    Subscribe for free to my show!
    1. Re:Now you can have those 64 CPUs by RPoet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And also, it would violate the GPL and GNUs criteria for software freedom.

      --
      "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
  5. Linux 2.6: I can only recommend it! by quigonn · · Score: 5, Informative

    We're running 2.6.0-test9 on several production machines at work, and we had absolutely no problem, so far, but a huge improvement on performance instead. The only thing one has to care about is that 2.6.0 requires module-init-tools instead of modutils. It's especially important to read the upgrade guide, so that one can easily switch back to 2.4.x even when using modules (not that I would miss 2.4.x, but you never know... not all people will have such flawless upgrade processes as I did).

    --
    A monkey is doing the real work for me.
    1. Re:Linux 2.6: I can only recommend it! by Billly+Gates · · 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/
    2. Re:Linux 2.6: I can only recommend it! by dossen · · Score: 3, Informative

      I don't know about Gentoo, but as far as installing module-init-tools/modutils, kernel and related stuff Source Mage GNU/Linux has been there for quite some time.

    3. Re:Linux 2.6: I can only recommend it! by Walterk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why are you running a test kernel on several PRODUCTION machines?

      --

      "If anyone needs me, I'm in the angry dome."
    4. Re:Linux 2.6: I can only recommend it! by shani · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It depends on the production, doesn't it? I mean, if you have a machine that collates addresses and prints mailing labels, then you can run with the test kernel and if it gives you better performance and works, who cares if it's "only for testing"? What's the problem?

    5. Re:Linux 2.6: I can only recommend it! by Dave2+Wickham · · Score: 4, Informative

      make moveold before make install - it moves the current lsmod, modprobe etc to lsmod.old, modprobe.old etc.

    6. Re:Linux 2.6: I can only recommend it! by BoysDontCry · · Score: 3, Informative

      Nope. Linux 2.4 needed modutils. 2.6 needs module-init-tools.

    7. Re:Linux 2.6: I can only recommend it! by brsmith4 · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you want, here is an RPM that contains updated modutils. The package is called modutils so that it cooperates with the pre-defined dependencies. It also allows you to boot 2.6 and 2.4 kernels. It works well for me on redhat 9

      modutils-2.4.21-22.i386.rpm

    8. Re:Linux 2.6: I can only recommend it! by Mullen · · Score: 2, Informative

      Depends. I worked at a place that used 6 Proc with 4 Gigs of memory systems that had 20 to 30 heavy users at any one time. We were using the 2.4.9 Redhat kernel and the machines would crash after 3 or 4 days. Considering we had 300 or 400 machines, you can take a guess what oncall was like. Well, I took a couple of the mid-level problem ones and replace the kernels with 2.4.18 release canidates (I played with the patches) and they did not crash for several weeks afterwards. Some servers never went down unless we rebooted them. Sometimes using beta stuff will save your ass, but as a general rule of thumb, your right, it can be bad.

      --
      Linux O Muerte!
    9. Re:Linux 2.6: I can only recommend it! by WNight · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Depends what they're doing, and what the expected failure modes are. If you've already got a cluster of webservers, it might make perfect sense to throw a 2.6 machine into the pool. If it fails it'll only be one hit in every so many, and it's easy to pull out once this happens. Perhaps you could do something like run your ad server on a new machine. Even if it fails, customers don't think the site is down.

      And from this, and from running tests on it, you know if 2.6 is going to offer you anything.

      There are many applications where a production machine could go down and not cause more than a few seconds of service outage. No lost data, no long downtimes, etc. As long as you understand that this is a test and prepare an immediate failover machine.

    10. Re:Linux 2.6: I can only recommend it! by spaceyhackerlady · · 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

  6. good stuff by inode_buddha · · 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 · · 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.

  7. Newsflash - Christmas Postponed.. by Channard · · Score: 5, Funny
    NEWSFLASH: Chrismas has been postponed as Santa has had an injunction placed on him by Linux copyright claimants SCO.

    'We intercepted a number of letters from Linux users to Mr Claus, requesting that he bring them the new 2.6 Linux Kernel for Christmas, and given that at least 50% of them have been good, we believe he was going to supply the requested code' said Daryl McScrooge, head of SCO's 'Grabbit and Runne' division.

    'Linux 2.6 was of course entirely written by ourselves and the tooth fairy and to protect our rights we have taken out an injunction preventing Father Christmas from delivering any presents this Christmas. We believe this is a fair and legal action. And anyway, I never did get that bike I asked for.'

    1. Re:Newsflash - Christmas Postponed.. by j3110 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The greating should actually be:
      "Happy Capitalistic Compulsory Consumerism month!" ...and may you have a marry new year of frivolous letigation against your own or potential clients.

      --
      Karma Clown
  8. IDE support on Dell Latitude D600 by cerberusss · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm running this new kernel to get full support on whatever IDE chipset my Dell Latitude D600 laptop uses. Combined with the better performance this kernel really rocks.

    --
    8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
  9. Not to nitpick, but by Space+cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I thought this was all Linus' doing - in the LWN text, he says that Andrew is off for a couple of weeks so he may release a test11 before Andrew decides to take it on for release management...

    Simon

    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
  10. Would you prefer better or released quicker ? by anti-NAT · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I prefer better, even it it takes a bit longer.

    "All good things come to those who wait."

    --
    The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
  11. They seem to have som problems though... by errl · · Score: 5, Informative

    A problem, potentially delaying release? Seems that they don't really know what causes it as of yet...

  12. Re:Keyboard still doesn't work by MrHanky · · Score: 5, Informative

    Have you tried "pci=noacpi" at the boot prompt? I had complete crashes (no kernel panic) when the keyboard was initialized before I tried that. Maybe your problem is related? (This is for a PS/2 type keyboard, BTW.)

    I don't think I have any problems with 2.6.0-test9-mm1 at all.

  13. The Best OS Ever! by dimss · · 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.

  14. Re:Xmas by contrasutra · · 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.

  15. YES: Gentoo and Source Mage do it by FreeUser · · Score: 3, Informative

    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?

    Gentoo GNU/Linux supports this, and I believe Source Mage does as well.

    I run 2.6.0-test10 and 2.6.0-test9-mm5 on numerous Gentoo boxes with no problem, and occasionally switch back to 2.4.22 without difficulties.

    I'm not sure how they do it exactly. A quick perusal of module-init-tools and modutils revealed that, for example, bot install /sbin/modinfo, and numerous symlinks to things like lsmod.old exist. There is probably a boot script that detects the kernel version on boot, creates the appropriate links, and then loads up the modules, but nothing in /etc/init.d jumped out at me as the culprit.

    In any event, it is certainly possible have both installed and functional, and to seemlessly move between 2.4.x and 2.6.x kernels.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  16. My bet by Vilim · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sure, mid-December might be when its ready. But I'm sticking with my bet of a Christmas day release. Linus likes to release kernels on holidays (he did one on christmas a while back and noone can forget the greased turkey). Perhaps he will name this one the greased reindeer or something :p

    --
    History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it - Sir Winston Churchill
    1. Re:My bet by naelurec · · Score: 2, Funny

      *shrug* when will he learn?? He needs to release it NOW to cash in on the holiday buying rush. :)

  17. Re:Debian support by scharkalvin · · Score: 4, Informative

    Debian supports 2.4 right now. You get your choice with 'woody'. True the default install CD DOES install 2.2, but if you boot with the BF24 image, you will install the 2.4 kernel. AND 2.4 kernel images ARE in the 'stable' package tree.

  18. Debian does it..... by PowerBert · · Score: 2, Funny


    Debian does it, Gentoo does it, even liti-gat-ed SCO does it. Lets do it, lets dual boot GNU/Linux.

    The modutils and module-init tools packages co-exist nicely on my Sid box.

  19. Red Hat builds by Bernie · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's worth reminding RH/Fedora users that Arjan van de Ven maintains kernel RPMs (including new module RPMs etc), and those with yum and apt can very easily test 2.6 using these files.

    Read the readme.txt for full details.

  20. Re:Xmas by diersing · · 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.

  21. 2.6 Kernel issues - Is it really ready? by cronot · · 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?

    1. Re:2.6 Kernel issues - Is it really ready? by Dionysus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Most notably (for me) is devfs not being actively supported anymore (being shifted in favor of udev).

      Well, the reason devfs is not actively supported is because the maintainer disappeared, and nobody has stepped up to take over the code.

      udev seems to solve the problem of only have /dev files that correspond to devices you have connected. But they are moving "back" to the old /dev/sg?1 etc. I much prefer the devfs nameing scheme (what do you do if you have more than 24 hds? The devfs had a solution for that).

      --
      Je ne parle pas francais.
  22. Re:That'd be nice by ultranova · · Score: 2, Funny

    "HAHHAHHAA !!! Now, we're gonna drop a few nukes to Washington and skin alive a couple hundred hostages and smear salt to their wounds and feed babies to sharks and..."

    "Excuse me, sir."

    "What is it ?!? Can't you see I'm busy planning ?"

    "Sir, according to the license of the new Linux kernel version, it cannot be legally used by terrorists."

    Long silence.

    In a tiny voice: "Um, maybe, maybe, just maybe, just this once, we could use it anyway ?"

    "SIR ! YOU ARE NOT GOING TO COMMIT COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT, ARE YOU !?!"

    Stunned silence. Horrified looks from all around. Then: "No, of course not ! Please forgive me, I don't know what came over me !"

    "Good. Some things are just going too far. Now, shall I start with skinning the prisoners ?"

    "No, feed the babies to sharks first, and let the hostages watch. Remember to cut those babies stomachs open first, so the sharks will smell blood. And tell our IT people to start planning to migrate to one of the BSDs."

    "Very good, sir."

    --

    Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  23. Any distro with kernel 2.6 and KDE 3.2 yet? by KamuSan · · 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 ;-)

  24. Re:any info on improved SATA support? by QSO_Wizard · · Score: 2, Informative

    I just tinker with linux, and before Mandrake 9.2 I was completely unable to get linux installed on my new system, which has SATA hard drives. I wasn't very hopeful when Mandrake 9.2 was released, but I thought I would give it a try. Fortunately, Mandrake 9.2 recognized my hard drives immediately and I had no problems installing it.

  25. alsa sound kernel support by HelloKitty · · 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
    1. Re:alsa sound kernel support by CTachyon · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you hear a hiss or have volume trouble, it means that the ALSA driver for your particular card you're using is buggy and not initializing the card correctly, and it has nothing to do with the ALSA core itself. File a bug report with ALSA, and include which driver you're using and what card you have, because it'll never get fixed if the developers are never told about it.

      --
      Range Voting: preference intensity matters
  26. Dear moderators, by greppling · · Score: 4, Insightful
    why is it that always people get a +5 Informative when they post a bug report to slashdot instead of sending it to LKML? When Logitech wireless hypersonic ultra XZ763 keyboard isn't working, the responsible maintainer should be informed, but why post it here?

    Those who are interested in such reports should read LKML. Let's keep slashdot for posts of general interest.

  27. Try SuSE 9 by IronTomFlint · · Score: 2, Informative
    I've got an ICH5 board and a Seagate SATA drive. The RH 9 installer wouldn't even boot, so I went to FreeBSD for a while, waiting for things to catch up in Linux (FreeBSD 5.1-RELEASE worked fine).

    I just installed SuSE 9, and it works fine. One caveat: on my machine, I had to add the following options:

    apm=off acpi=ht

    in order to get the thing working. And now it works fine. I'm not sure that I'm up to full SATA speed yet, but it's pretty fast.

    --
    Arrr!
  28. Benchmarks here (linux 2.4, 2.6, *bsd) by Szplug · · Score: 2, Informative

    here

    --
    Someday we'll all be negroes
  29. Re:Welcome to the immaturity of Linux by dylan_- · · Score: 3, Funny
    would be stomped out in any organization that had a financial investment in producing professional, streamlined output.
    Actually, no. In an "organization that had a financial investment in producing professional, streamlined output" HyperDev would be dropped because the Head of Team SupraDev had recently become engaged to the boss's niece. Only half of Team HyperDev would be informed of this, and no-one in Team CyberDeX (which depends on the correct Dev) would be informed at all. Marketing would state that the product would be ready in three weeks, despite the fact that none of them even know what CyberDeX does.

    CyberDeX would be released 3 months later and if you tried to use it with more than 2 users it would fall over. A patch would be released 6 weeks later which allowed you to have 3 users. The product would crash daily.

    One year later CyberDeX would finally become something approaching stable with the release of Service Pack 4, which essentially rips out SupraDev and puts HyperDev back in.

    The head of Team SupraDev gets promotion and a raise.
    --
    Igor Presnyakov stole my hat