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."

7 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. 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 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. 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.

  4. 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. :)

  5. 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?

  6. 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.