Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux Kernel 2.2.26 -- 2.2 is not dead!

Posted by timothy on from the continuing-updates-as-they-happen dept.

midianus writes "Marc-Christian Petersen released Linux Kernel version 2.2.26. The release includes several security fixes. After Alan Cox released the previous 2.2 kernel, 2.2.25 in March of 2003, he began a one year sabbatical to study for an MBA in August of the same year and handed over the Maintainership of 2.2 to Marc-Christian."

7 of 29 comments (clear)

  1. 2.2.? by Ann+Coulter · · Score: 4, Informative

    2.0.? is not dead either. Their 2.0.40 was released only two and a half weeks ago.

    1. Re:2.2.? by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How well do these earlier kernels perform on old hardware, say a 486 ? Are they lighter than the 2.4 and 2.6 kernels ? I've never really had a chance to try them.

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
  2. COOL! by Sevn · · Score: 4, Funny

    So this makes it into debian stable by say, December 2005?

    --
    For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
    1. Re:COOL! by damiam · · Score: 4, Informative

      I use Debian and love it, but let's not be too misleading here. It took a couple weeks for Firefox to get into unstable, and kernel 2.6.0 was still the newest option even for a while after 2.6.2 had been released. Unstable is great, but it's not always up-to-date (it took a year for XFree86 4.3 to get in, although that's a whole other can of worms...).

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  3. Re:Confused by Haeleth · · Score: 5, Informative

    If someone fixes a bug in 2.4 or 2.6 that was also present in 2.2, it makes sense to fix it in 2.2 as well. That's one of the jobs of the 2.2 maintainer.

  4. Number of minor releases by reignbow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is there a reason that 2.2 has only one tiny release more than the 2.4 kernel? I mean, if you look at the most recent tiny versions:

    2.0.40
    2.2.26
    2.4.25
    2.6.3

    I believe that the releases of 2.x.0 were about equally spaced, so why isn't there 2.2.34 or something like that coming out? Fewer bugs? A more laid-back maintainer? Not as much movement in the OSS world?

    --
    Divide et impera!
  5. Re:Confused by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 4, Informative
    Here is the Changelog in all it's glory. Mostly security fixes.

    If you need a more secured, more stable, even faster, better SMP support, IDE LBA48 support, LFS support, IPSec support, HTB support, IPVS support etc. enabled kernel with many more features and important fixes, please use my 2.2-secure tree.
    You may find more informations about it at http://www.wolk-project.de.

    2.2.26
    • CAN-2004-0077: behave safely in case of do_munmap() failures in mremap(2)
    • CAN-2003-0984: /dev/rtc can leak parts of kernel memory to unprivileged users (2.4 backport)
    • CAN-2003-0244: hashing exploits in network stack (David S. Miller)
    • update_atime() performance improvement (2.4 backport) (Solar Designer)
    • ability to swapoff after a device file might have been re-created
    • MAINTAINERS correction for Kernel 2.2 and 2.2 fixes (me)
    • fixed some typos (Solar Designer, me)
    Sorry, had to edit that a bit to get it past the lameness filter. Most (all?) of the other patches here came from Solar Designer.
    --
    Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.