Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Talking With 2.0 Kernel Maintainer David Weinehall

Posted by timothy on from the in-my-day-we-didn't-have-a-preemptable-kernel dept.

Jeremy Andrews writes "While the recently released 2.6 Linux kernel is all the rage these days, the much older 2.0 kernel is still alive and kicking. KernelTrap has interviewed David Weinehall, the maintainer of the 2.0 Linux kernel. David became the 2.0 maintainer in December of 1999, after Alan Cox moved on to work full time on the 2.2 kernel. In this interview David talks about what's involved in maintaining the 2.0 kernel, who uses it, when we can expect the impending release of 2.0.40, why you should upgrade (if you're still running 2.0.39), and more."

17 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Latest and greatest not for everyone by gasgesgos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's like the people that still use Windows 95, sure it's not as new and flashy, but it still runs on the crappy hardware from years ago... And sometimes, that's all you need.

  2. Anybody... by TypoNAM · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Still maintaining the 1.0 kernel? :)

    --
    This space is not for rent.
  3. Freedom by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Isn't it great? One of the best things with free software is that anyone is free to maintain and support it for as long as they wish. Compare to say, NT 4.0, which is perfectly capable for some tasks, but users are forced to switch because MS cuts support (read: no more security updates.)

    --
    .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
  4. Aerospace COmmunity by nil5 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Not many people realize that a lot of us in the aerospace community rely on older versions of the kernel due to its "nimbleness" for fly-by-wire systems, etc. A lot of us don't need the newer features of more recent kernels, and having something that does the bare minimum--fast-- is optimal.

    We really have to be thankful that people maintain the older versions!

    1. Re:Aerospace COmmunity by nil5 · · Score: 4, Informative

      What you have to realize is the cost of developing a proprietary system versus being able to use COTS (consumer off the shell) parts and a FREE OS. The testing procedures are the same as with a proprietary system, but you have the benefit of a OS that has been thoroughly tested by MANY people over 5 years or so. Bundle this with a modern, fast Intel processor and you don't have to worry about designing a gigahertz system yourself--certainly a fair design challenge.

      The bottom line is cost. This has opened up many doors for experimental aircraft as well.

    2. Re:Aerospace COmmunity by beeblebrox87 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even if what you say is true, theres no reason why a proprietary solution makes more sense. If I'm putting the life in the hands of a computer, I damn well want to be able to know about every piece of code that computer is running.

      But really, Linux isn't a consumer OS. Linux is a kernel frequently used in consumer OSes. This means its been tested by a _lot_ of people, and is that much more stable as a result. There is nothing particularly consumerish about the kernel itself (certainly not the 2.0 kernel), and aerospace companies can easily just configure without consumer-oriented features.

      I fail to see why you think open source software is somehow less able to protect human life than proprietary software.

    3. Re:Aerospace COmmunity by eclectro · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A consumer OS (linux is a consumer OS, BTW) should NOT be controlling fly-by-wire... human life is at risk.

      So a non-consumer OS should be used?

      Here is an example of custom software causing a crash.

      With aircraft systems becopming more and more complex, it does give one pause as to what could happen if there was a "blue screen" or "kernal panic".

      IMHO, it doesn't matter what software is used. If it is engineered poorly, it will perform poorly. One would hope that any critical system that relies on software would "fail gracefully", but with budget pressures on a project anything can happen.

      A well-tested "consumer" OS can be a lot better than completely untested custom software.

      Poor software, like poor concrete, will crumble, no matter where it comes from.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  5. Great to know by inflex · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've got at least a dozen production machines which have been going since Slackware 3.6, so I'm very glad to see the 2.0 kernels still being 'overseen' by someone.

    The hardware is old, it works with the 2.0.x kernels, it works fast and without issues (except for exploits of course), so why bother making a radical change which might end up breaking more by moving to the latest.

  6. Who's using it... by evilviper · · Score: 4, Funny
    In autumn 2002 I also started to work quite a lot for the Debian-project,

    There's you're answer to "who's using it"... Debian!

    I have to admit, I suspected it all along...
    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  7. Re:Latest and greatest not for everyone by Lord+Kano · · Score: 4, Informative

    Thats kinda why I find it more surprising that people use the older versions of the kernel, considering its not costing you more than a few minutes time to download the latest tarball from your local mirror, and setup a new kernel!

    I think that's where you're missing the point.

    The way the kernel deals with devices changed a great deal between 2.0.x and 2.2.x and even moreso for 2.4.x, if you've got some custom apps that work just fine on the hardware that you're using, what's the point in upgrading?

    No risk of having to debug unforseen problems with running your app in a new environment.

    If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  8. Speaking of kernel news... by blixel · · Score: 5, Informative

    2.6.2 has been out for several hours now ... (changelog here) - surprised /. hasn't picked this up yet. It's not like the /. editors care about hammering a site. :)

  9. Looking for a job? by black666 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Since I'm currently unemployed, I'd really like to take the chance to do some shameless self-advertising: anyone who needs a Debian-developer, kernel-maintainer, system-administrator/integrator (Linux, AIX, and Solaris experience), or programmer of C, 6510-assembler or PHP (yes, I can do website development, just don't ask me to do the design; I can do all (X)HTML/CSS for them, but you wouldn't like me to do the artworks...)

    How come that such a skilled person with enough references can't find a job?

    1. Re:Looking for a job? by Zo0ok · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I do have an IT-related job in Sweden, and occationally we actually employ new people.

      We (my company, I dont personally recruit people) are not looking for the most brilliant and ambitious people out there. We employ those who have exactly the right level of skills. Sounds strange, but when the times changes, if you have employed over-qualified people they will demand higher salaries, more interesting duties, and maybe they will leave nevertheless. Being overqualified is as bad as being underqualified.

      Unfortunately, these days companies are not working with new cool upstart projects that they need smart entrepreneurs and geeks for - they rather work with streamlining their (organisational) processes, and maintanance.

      Also, they dont want to really employ someone (if they do, they see it as a strategic decision). The rather hire a consultant or "Manpower"-guy. (This might primarily be true for Sweden).

      I am not saying erasing merits from your CV will increase your chances, but the fact that someone else with more skills do not get a job does not automatically imply you wont.

      Work experience is always valuable though (unless perhaps you are 55+).

  10. Re:Latest and greatest not for everyone by teamhasnoi · · Score: 4, Funny
    I have to agree! My install of Windows 95 has been running smoothly for years - in fact, I haven't rebooted since I installed it in 1996! Let's see, what do I have on here....

    Oh crap, that's screen burn-in.

  11. very interesting by CAIMLAS · · Score: 4, Interesting

    after reading his interview, it seems to me as if there are still fairly frequent problems with 2.0 relating to stability and potential security problems.

    I don't recall hearing about these problems all that often with the newer 2.4; is it just my perception, or are the new kernels more soundly written than the older ones?

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  12. Re:Latest and greatest not for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    the 2.0.x kernel is used HEAVILY in embedded systems. this is a place where it takes YEARS to get things certified safe to run by the engineers.

    Can I install 2.6.1 on that system and run it? you bet I can, and with no speed loss. but I lose the knowledge that the kernel will NOT be a point of failure. Absolutely nobody can tell me the exact failure points of the 2.6 or even the 2.4 kernels. while the 2.0 kernel is completely documented and certified by the in house people here to be 99% solid. (Windows CE get's a 50% rating, a full 5% higher than windows nt,2000,xp) While QNX and BSD here are still below 80% as far as the testing people rate it... and that is what matter's to us.

    Not something that a know-nothing with no credentials says in the press.... what we see in real testing over the course of a 24 month period trying to force it to fail. (Yes, even baking the board beyond operating temps...)

    all this for testing a firmware for upcoming cable tv boxes and other embedded systems related to video/communication.

  13. Re:Typical open-source programmer by minus9 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    When will the slashbot crowd realize that their Free software pipe dream will completely destroy the programming profession?

    If a kernel maintainer can't find a programming job then the programming profession is pretty much destroyed already.