Slashdot Mirror
No 2.7 Linux Kernel Branch Due Soon
An anonymous reader writes "At the fourth annual Linux Kernel Developers Summit, it was decided that there won't be a 2.7 Linux kernel development branch any time soon. Instead, Linux creator Linus Torvalds and the official 2.6 maintainer Andrew Morton have decided to continue working as a team, further enhancing the 2.6 kernel. Up to this point, kernels ending in an odd number (2.1, 2.3, 2.5, etc) were considered development kernels, and kernels ending in an even number (2.2, 2.4, 2.6, etc) were considered stable kernels. However, according to this KernelTrap article, active development will now continue in the mainline 2.6 tree, and the final stabilization will be left up to the companies that provide Linux distributions."
The 2.6 linux kernel has been a roller coaster ride of development, and it was obvious from the switch from 2.5->2.6 that the kernel was far from ready for prime time.
So, now we're stuck with a rapidly developing 2.6 kernel that poses a lot of risks for anyone wishing to adopt the new so-percieved "stable" kernel into an OS/Embedded/Other product.
In a way, this is just an acknowledgement that things went a bit too fast with 2.6, and that waiting to release it -after- some pretty solid core feature freezes would have been good.
There is still a lot of development and teething going on, and it's going to be a real pain on the part of "third party distributors" to find and use whatever build-of-the-week is more stable than another in a given sub-branch of the 2.6 kernel.
Oh well, so much for having a nice stable 2.6 base to build new functionality into.
"Don't worry about the problems you have in mathematics, I assure you mine are much greater." - Einstein c.1919
So what exactly does this mean for distributions such as Slackware wich ship a vanilla kernel? Personally I always preferred having it "as it was meant to be" without any tweaking of the distributor.
The latest Fedora Core 2 debacle proves that this can lead to trouble (NVidia Binaries broken, etc.).
Distributions such as SLKX (wich ships a vanilla 2.4.22) didnt include the 2.6 series as the defaultkernel. My guess is Patrick didnt trust the beast yet. So what is a man like Pat to do if there isnt the manpower or will to patch the kernel but the "stable" branch cant be trusted anymore, too?
That said, it could be a good thing to preempt the distros from forking in order to add new features that they do not want to wait for, and it also adds the benefit of Linux providing the OS features that you want ASAP, not in 2005, err, maybe 2006, 2007 or 2008 when the next major release is planned-- that would be the Longhorn development model.
Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
I'm sorry your forcedeth driver example is harsh. The driver is clearly labelled as "EXPERIMENTAL", and what's more it is *reverse engineered* because nvidia didn't want to give out the documentation to it. You are lucky someone was actually working on it at all.
As a sidenote, nvidia is now actually contributing to this very driver, however that has been since 2.6.7.
So this line of argument holds no water.
Maybe they should call the current 2.6.x series -RELEASE, and then when 2.7.x starts, call it -STABLE as it goes into maintenence mode.
Having the 3 forms like FreeBSD does: -CURRENT, -RELEASE, and -STABLE, is a good model, IMO. -CURRENT means you shouldn't touch it unless you are a developer, -RELEASE means end users can touch it, but it is not necessarily stable.. it's kind of a beta that's good enough for public consumption for the most part. And -STABLE is the ultra solid, will-not-crash, version.
So, 2.4.x = -STABLE
2.6.x = -RELEASE
2.6.x-mm = -CURRENT