Slashdot Mirror


Linux Kernel 2.6.8 Released

J ROC writes "According to The Linux Kernel Archives kernel 2.6.8 is now out. It includes some fixes from 2.6.7. Happy upgrading." You may want to read this earlier story and think twice before upgrading.

203 comments

  1. I'm waiting on SP2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Because we all know no OS is stable without a few service packs applied.

    1. Re:I'm waiting on SP2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SP1 (2.6.8.1) is out already. Only one more left to go!

    2. Re:I'm waiting on SP2 by andersa · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      SP2 is oooold! SP8 is the latest, which was just released.

    3. Re:I'm waiting on SP2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about that kernel upgrade...

  2. 2.6.8.1? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why are there "2.6.8.1" archives on ftp.kernel.org?

    1. Re:2.6.8.1? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      ".1" is the new archive format that Linus adopted with 2.6.7. Just google for "un1", then download and install un1, download the linux-kernel-2.6.8.1 file, cd to /usr/src, and type "un1 -r x ~/linux-kernel-2.6.8.1"

  3. latest is 2.6.8.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    according to kernel.org latest is 2.6.8.1

  4. 2.6.8.1 is really the latest by scotsgit · · Score: 5, Informative

    Due to an NFS bug a brown paper bag release was produced.

    1. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by hrakers · · Score: 5, Informative

      See http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0408 .1/2049.html for more info

    2. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by Spirilis · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This might be a silly question, but what does "brown paper bag" release mean? (and how did the phrase come into use? :-D)

      --
      the real at&t mix
    3. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by Dave2+Wickham · · Score: 5, Informative

      From what I understand it's basically a release with a screw-up somewhere. A symbol of embarassment (don't know how to put that better...) is to wear a brown paper bag on your head. The dodgy release was embarassing, hence the brown paper bag release.

    4. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/b/brown-paper -bag_bug.html

    5. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by Taurim · · Score: 1

      Argh, just fell in it !

      The kernel Oopsed (no crash) when trying to launch an executable located on a NFSv3 server.

      No problems anymore with the 1 character patch.

      And all the proprietary modules I need still install and work fine (VMware, NVidia, Cisco VPN client)

    6. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/Change Log-2.6.8.1

      says:

      [PATCH] Fix NFS client screw-up in fcntl f_op removal

      Fix stupid thinkos in the fcntl f_op removal code.

      Linux 2.6.8.1

    7. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by Spirilis · · Score: 1

      Ahh OK. Another poster revealed this is in the jargon file too... thanks!

      --
      the real at&t mix
    8. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? I thought the idea was that, with a CD or book, say, if it went to press and then somebody noticed a mistake, since it would be too expensive to re-print or re-package the whole thing, they'd send it out to retailers in a paper bag with amendments. E.g., John Lennon's album where he's naked on the cover, when it transpired that record stores wouldn't sell it (or it was illegal in some areas, or whatever the problem was) the record company sent it out in brown paper bags with product information on them.

      Not really sure, that was just how I interpreted it before I saw your post and realized I may have been wrong.

    9. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by jlp2097 · · Score: 2, Informative

      1. There is a typo (unnecessary space) in your link.
      2. I like marc.theaimsgroup.com much better.

      So for the lazy among us: klicky.

    10. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by nyseal · · Score: 1

      So there's a known "screw-up" but they release it anyway. Hmmm, sounds familiar.

      --
      [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
    11. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by pizza_milkshake · · Score: 2, Informative

      it's not his url, slashcode breaks up long strings to prevent the page from getting stretched horizontally

    12. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by jlp2097 · · Score: 1

      Interesting, I didn't know that.

    13. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by rokzy · · Score: 1

      aren't brown paper bags embarassing because they're used when buying porn?

    14. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That means it was getting close to being released and after they made it available for download it was discovered that there was a screw up, so they didn't make an anouncement. Kind of like what happened w/ KDE 3.3 release canadate one (I think thats the one it was), they had made it available for download, but discovered a huge bug (I think in kio-slave), so they didn't make an anouncement(that RC1 was out) and release the next one a couple days later.

    15. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      Gosh, I can hardly wait for the /. index-page article announcing 2.6.8.1.1!

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    16. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by sacmog · · Score: 0
      Or if you are a New Orleans Saints fan.

      --
      --- last minute desparate solutions to impossible problems created by other fucking people.
    17. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by salimma · · Score: 1

      That's why URLs should be written as links instead of the address being spelt out as normal text :)

      --
      Michel
      Fedora Project Contribut
    18. Re:2.6.8.1 is really the latest by kwoff · · Score: 1

      Hm, I was thinking the brown paper bag was for people who were hyperventilating.

  5. Download from mirror nearest to you by anandpur · · Score: 3, Informative
  6. Re:Dam by Rysc · · Score: 1

    Did you note the day? Today is Saturday, also known as "Slow News Day" here on Slashdot. Any story of even minor interest will get posted.

    --
    I want my Cowboyneal
  7. Re:Dam by maskedbishounen · · Score: 2, Informative

    News for nerds, stuff that matters...? ;)

    --
    "An infinite number of monkeys typing into GNU emacs would never make a good program."
  8. Re:Dam by cdc179 · · Score: 1

    Damn, 2.6 hasn't been out very long...how in the hell could anybody misread this as being a 2.8 release, unless you are just completely clueless.

  9. Re:Dam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    because for the more security conscious, it is good to have a more recent kernel, to make fixing when a bug is released trivial

  10. Re:Dam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's Saturday morning, what sort of breaking news do you expect? Perhaps one about the hundreds dead in Florida from the hurricane?

    Oh comon, cut the dramatics, there's only 2 verified deaths so far.

    /me mumbles something about drama queens.

  11. Re:Dam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They just said 4 on TV, but you know there will be more.

  12. 2.6.8.1 by calibanDNS · · Score: 5, Informative

    The latest is actually 2.6.8.1. The (very short) change log for that version can be found here. Looks like there was an NFS bug in the 2.6.8 release that needed to be fixed.

    1. Re:2.6.8.1 by ThisNukes4u · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I guess they were really serious when they said that the stabilization of the kernel was up to the distro maintainers. Guess I won't be downloading 2.6.8 until 2.6.9 comes out.

      --
      thisnukes4u.net
    2. Re:2.6.8.1 by bfields · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I guess they were really serious when they said that the stabilization of the kernel was up to the distro maintainers. Guess I won't be downloading 2.6.8 until 2.6.9 comes out.

      They've been saying for some time that they'd also release small updates (like 2.6.8.1) against previous releases when necessary, so it should be reasonably safe to take a recent kernel if you wait a couple weeks after the major release and check for any such updates.

      For what it's worth, I've been upgrading on every major release (and most of the -rc's too) since 2.6.0, without any disasters.

      Of course, depending on which particular drivers you care about and so on, your mileage may vary.

      --Bruce Fields

    3. Re:2.6.8.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoo hoo! More version digits!

    4. Re:2.6.8.1 by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 1

      One of the 2.6.x set (I think it was 2.6.4) would not boot for me. I think it was a problem with the IDE drivers.

      Most of the time I wait for Slashdot to announce the kernel and check for comments announcing bugs. This time I did not bother waiting, but got lucky in that 2.6.8.1 was already available by the time I came to download.

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
    5. Re:2.6.8.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I'd just like to remind fellow open source fans that FreeBSD has, and always will have a -STABLE branch for those important production machines.

      Thank you.

    6. Re:2.6.8.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      PING 2.6.8.1 (2.6.8.1) 56(84) bytes of data.

      --- 2.6.8.1 ping statistics ---
      158 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 157172ms
    7. Re:2.6.8.1 by listen · · Score: 1

      I'd just like to remind fellow open source fans that
      " always will have " is a pretty strong statement for an AC to make about project he probably has nothing whatsoever to do with.

      Who knows, FreeBSD might copy this new Linux release process if it proves tremendously successful, with a few modifications to fit into their monolithic organisation vs. multiple distributions and individual developers of the Linux world.

    8. Re:2.6.8.1 by sloanster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I guess they were really serious when they said that the stabilization of the kernel was up to the distro maintainers.

      LOL, the sky is not falling...

      99.9% of linux users do not build their disto from scratch, but get their distro from a vcendor, so this means absolutely nothing for the vast majority. Those that are smart enough to build their own kernels, are also smart enough to follow the kernel mailing list and apply patches.

      I've been running 2.6 kernels from kernel.org as well as -mm kernels on my FC1 boxes, which are fairly busy servers, and have had no problems. compiling 2.6.8.1 as we speak, so to speak. Also, novell/suse are shipping not only their personal and professional retail versions, but also their latest enterprise version, with the 2.6 kernel and it is rock solid.

      I agree that the 2.6 kernel is far more stable than 2.4 was at this stage -

    9. Re:2.6.8.1 by Peter+La+Casse · · Score: 1
      Guess I won't be downloading 2.6.8 until 2.6.9 comes out.

      If 2.6.9 is out, I recommend you download that, not 2.6.8.

    10. Re:2.6.8.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's really getting bad.
      My concerns that the 2.6 series become unstable due to the lack of an 2.7 tree seem to be confirmed.
      What the hell to Linus thinks he is doing?
      Don't he remeber the "good old days" then nearly the whole community was pissed up, when he decided to introduce a new memomery managment in the 2.4 series?
      Has he forgotten, that a 2.4 release got a don't use label?
      Does he ignore, that the active(!) IDE development in 2.4 (stable branche!) nearly broke IDE support in 2.4? (Btw. Thanks Alan for fixing it)

      Linus: Keep your hands off the stable branch!
      Thanks in adavance...

    11. Re:2.6.8.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One small typo, one BIG bug. Silly developers.

  13. Stack Overflow Protection by dduardo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Has the 2.6 branch been patched with exec-shield yet? I know there is some compatibility issues, but Linus said he was going to allow it anyway.

    1. Re:Stack Overflow Protection by Soul-Burn666 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Search the changelog for "no execute" and you'll get the patch details for adding support for NX.

      --
      ^_^
    2. Re:Stack Overflow Protection by dduardo · · Score: 2, Informative

      I know they added hardware NX, but i'm wondering if they added softwared based NX similiar to Window's DEP in SP2.

    3. Re:Stack Overflow Protection by juhaz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Exec Shield isn't the same thing as support for NX-bit, it's "no execute" protection that DOESN'T require CPU support.

    4. Re:Stack Overflow Protection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      it's "no execute" protection that DOESN'T require CPU support.

      Since you INSIST it DOESN'T you probably DON'T want to READ this, especially not the part about how it works and uses x86 features (code limit).

      Cue the "CPU support isn't CPU support" comment . . .

  14. Re:Dual Boot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what about reading the fucking changelog?

  15. Summary? by tweakt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I scanned the Changelog briefly and didn't see anything major. I usually grep for 'thinkpad' or 'laptop' (my main system), to see if there is anything nice to try out. There are some laptop_mode improvements (disk IO buffering, keeps hard drive spun down for as long as possible) which should benefit any laptop user.

    On occasion, someone will write up a nice summary of highlights. Anyone seen such a thing for 2.6.8?

    1. Re:Summary? by Zarhan · · Score: 2, Informative

      On occasion, someone will write up a nice summary of highlights. Anyone seen such a thing for 2.6.8?

      Kerneltrap usually posts one shortly after release. Not yet posted for 2.6.8, though, but check periodically, I would think that they will update later today.

    2. Re:Summary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Lots of memory leaks fixed.
      Lots of USB issues fixed.
      A few patches for prism based wireless card too.
      Several filesystem patches:
      EXT3 deadlocks removed and buffer issue fixed.
      EXT2, Reiser + JFS I/O errors lost issue fixed.
      Network oops, I/O oops created in 2.6.7, smbfs + nfs oops, SATA + Highmem oops
      X86_64 Memory corruption fix's + "small + serious" bugs.
      New hardware support for latest VIA K8%, KT%, VT%, PM% chipsets.
      NX (No eXecute) support for x86

  16. Re:Dual Boot? by Ryan+Huddleston · · Score: 4, Informative

    That didn't have anything at all do do with the kernel.

    I believe that it was the way Red Hat installer, Anaconda, installed GRUB, the GRand Unified Bootloader, that was at fault. The Linux kernel is generally quite solid, and I certainly will be upgrading.

  17. Re:Dam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the more security conscious shouldn't rely on slashdot as their sole news source.

  18. Re:Dual Boot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was not such a big deal... I had the same problem, i had to enter few commands in console and my windows was working again. I think that i read somewhere that windows is using some old scheme to identify disk partitions or something, and that is why there was a problem...

  19. Maybe by Moth7 · · Score: 1

    Because there's a 2 at one end, an 8 at the other and I don't expect Slashdot to be announcing minor releases?

    1. Re:Maybe by dmanny · · Score: 1

      In fairness, there is no dev branch as of yet. So this is the way of all progress in the kernel for now

      --
      All my previous sigs now look like this one, I wish they were permanetly recorded when used. :-(
    2. Re:Maybe by cdc179 · · Score: 1

      You must be new here. /. has always anounced incremental kernel versions.

  20. Re:Dam by mostlyalmighty · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I care, I bet a lot of others care too. Thus /. is serving its purpose for me.

    Upgrading your kernel is good for the soul.

  21. Speaking of the ChangeLog.. by maskedbishounen · · Score: 5, Funny

    Finding a specific change from kernel ChangeLogs is like finding a girl on /.; you've heard rumors, but you'll never find what you want once you start looking!

    --
    "An infinite number of monkeys typing into GNU emacs would never make a good program."
  22. I agree/need hurricane news by zogger · · Score: 1

    I have no idea why we don't have a hurricane thread running, it's big news. Slashdot is large enough to maybe have direct postings from the site,to actually *break some news*, see what folks got for emergency communications and gear working. I'm monitoring it on a dozen websites and trying to get some info off the emergency shortwave nets. I'm getting some info off of 14.325 and 14.265 megaherz.

    1. Re:I agree/need hurricane news by Ma�djeurtam · · Score: 1

      You mean, like this one? :-)

      --
      Instant Karma's gonna get you, Gonna knock you right on the head (John Lennon, 1970)
    2. Re:I agree/need hurricane news by zogger · · Score: 1

      thanks, plain didn't see it. Running slashdot lite here, didn't notice it, I don't look at the polls much, just the articles.

  23. Download Size by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm repeating this message from OSNews, which had the story first.

    I think Linux is a great kernel, but a 42 MB download is really a bit too much for my liking. Much of that is code for hardware that I don't have or features that I don't want. I am a great advocate of modularity, and I would like to see it applied not only to the compiled kernel, but also to the sources. I am aware that this will add some administrative overhead, but it could save a lot of traffic and CPU time.

    Here are some ideas:

    - Split the distribution in a base that has the common stuff, and optional add-ons for lesser-used network devices, filesystems, etc. etc.

    - Employ a BSD ports like system that downloads the sources on request (i.e. when compilation of some part is requested)

    - Distribute only the configuration interface, and download only the parts actually needed based on the configuration selected.

    I am too occupied now to come up with a proper proposal, but I hope this will set some people thinking.

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    1. Re:Download Size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That would probably ultimately result in the definition of a stable module interface between the linux kernel and device drivers. This has been explicitly stated as a non-goal by Linus for his tree as it would facilitate the production of closed-source hardware drivers, and we/he wants to "encourage" open-source device drivers (quite rightly IMHO, but I disagree with his method*).

      * I think a stable module interface might be _good_ for open-source drivers - hardware manufacturers may never produce their own open-source drivers, but if they are writing closed source drivers to a stable API, that stable API becomes a breakout point at which reverse engineers can install analysis and produce the information required to produce a community-written open source driver. But the trouble with that is that the United Reich of American Corporations has begun pushing for criminalistion of reverse engineering.

    2. Re:Download Size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      42 MB download is really a bit too much for my liking.

      pfft, you lightweight.

    3. Re:Download Size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's an idea, download the patch instead and apply it to your 2.6.7 kernel source.

      Or, Shock, Horror... Don't upgrade, if there's no pressing reason you want the latest version for, youre probably not loosing out on much.

      If you still want a modular download option, can I recomend you do it yourself and stop moaning at those people who are hard at work.

    4. Re:Download Size by Quixote · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you have the previous version, you can just download the patch; it is 3691743 bytes (about 3.5MB).

    5. Re:Download Size by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

      LOL. "It might stabilize the API" has to be the worst objection I've ever heard.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    6. Re:Download Size by hrakers · · Score: 1

      Most distros come with some sort of vanilla or patched kernel tree and you can patch those to the latest kernel revision which requires a much smaller download (for example the bzip2'd patch for 2.6.7 -> 2.6.8 is only 3.5M) But you do have a point. It might be nice to just release a make config/menuconfig style kernel configurator which, after you selected your system specific options and drivers, downloads only those specific parts of the kernel that you selected. Maybe some menuconfig style sort of kernel configurator in which you set which downloads the parts of the source

    7. Re:Download Size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed, but it is the stock objection you hear on LKML!

    8. Re:Download Size by Rich0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Here's an idea, download the patch instead and apply it to your 2.6.7 kernel source.

      I wonder if the gentoo maintainers have any plans to offer such a feature.

      Gentoo frequently downloads just a patch for security fixes - which is really nice if you have a modem, and you still have the original source lying around (gentoo caches source files, and will re-download whatever it needs).

      However, the routine isn't smart enough (to my knowledge) to determine what you already have and as a result what you need to download.

      So, if you're running 2.6.7-r6 and -r7 comes out, it is reasonably likely to download a patch.

      On the other hand, if 2.6.8 comes out it probably won't. If you go strait to 2.6.8-r1 it will probably download all of 2.6.8 and a patch to make it -r1.

    9. Re:Download Size by GammaTau · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think Linux is a great kernel, but a 42 MB download is really a bit too much for my liking.

      That's the size of the .tar.gz version. Bzip2 compresses a lot better. The .tar.bz2 version at kernel.org is about 9 MB smaller.

    10. Re:Download Size by Spoing · · Score: 4, Insightful
      1. I think Linux is a great kernel, but a 42 MB download is really a bit too much for my liking.

      [ suggestions for reducing the source update snipped ]

      The upgrade patch from 2.6.7 to 2.6.8 is under 4MB and can be found right along with the complete source here.

      Splitting the kernel source into parts would be a logistical problem...and I'd rather the developers not be bothered with it. If you want source, and you want small file sizes, using a diff to patch a previous release is a reasonable compromise. There are plenty of comments on the web on how to apply these patches, so being a developer isn't even necessary.

      Most of the suggestions you have would be appropriate for a binary release, though binary kernel packages are much smaller anyway so much of the benifit there is also lost.

      That said, there could be improvements on the package updates for just about every package ... I don't know any that do atomic updates (ex: MD5 sums of the files and fetch only the ones that differ...or apply a patch to make the files match.). That would be quite handy for mass deployment of files over a LAN to cut down network traffic; push out the update details to the clients, have the local systems check if they need a specific file, have the local systems report back what they need or if they are already OK. Not ideal for every situation, though it could be benificial. I wouldn't be surprised if the Tivo updates are handled like this.

      --
      A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    11. Re:Download Size by gl4ss · · Score: 0, Redundant

      how about if you really think any of those features are worth s*it you do it?

      they're not deemed worthwhile, hence nobody is doing that.

      enermous complexity...

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    12. Re:Download Size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Three words:

      rsync.

    13. Re:Download Size by tenco · · Score: 1
      I think Linux is a great kernel, but a 42 MB download is really a bit too much for my liking.

      You should get bzip2. Cuts down the filesize to about 34 MB...

    14. Re:Download Size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, use rsync,dowload the patches, stick with your current kernel,
      stick with your vendor kernel.
      If nothing else, drivers should be split from the core kernel.

    15. Re:Download Size by r101 · · Score: 1

      Or try this script to do it automatically:

      http://www.selenic.com/ketchup

    16. Re:Download Size by tjrw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This has come up numerous times before on lkml and been debated to death. Search the archives if you want to see the arguments. Executive summary is, it isn't going to happen. If you're into kernel-hacking, or just following the latest updates, I would hope that you already have 2.6.7, in which case the patch is not particularly large. There's no need to download the whole thing every time.

    17. Re:Download Size by Trumpetgod2k1 · · Score: 0
      You're talking about entirely replacing the core of your operating system, and the download is only 42 MB. I'd say thats pretty darn good in light of the recent windows XP SP2 at roughly 255 MB.


      - Distribute only the configuration interface, and download only the parts actually needed based on the configuration selected.


      Thats the only one of those ideas I think is feasable, since the rest of them require somebody's arbitrary decision as to what is "necessary, common, and uncommon." Splitting the download like that would involve solving a ton of build depencancies and require end users to basicaly guess which packages they need.
    18. Re:Download Size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Patching Linux? Say it isn't so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    19. Re:Download Size by iabervon · · Score: 1

      It probably wouldn't be hard to produce scripts which would extract the configuration and build system from a linux distribution, so that you could distribute only that part initially, and get other files as needed. (Actually, you'd probably do it by the directory to keep things simple)

      On the other hand, you'd have to download multiple things in order to build your kernel, and you'd have to download parts after you'd configured. The kernel site would have to either have a lot of little tar files (which wouldn't compress as well) or build tar files of your desired list on the fly (which increases the server load).

      I doubt it would actually be worthwhile, but a patch to the build system to list the directories needed for a particular configuration would probably be welcome.

    20. Re:Download Size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you'd have to be quite a few versions behind before it wouldn't pay off to get the patches ...

    21. Re:Download Size by sloanster · · Score: 1

      I think Linux is a great kernel, but a 42 MB download is really a bit too much for my liking.

      A suggestion: you don't have to download anything. Your distro provides you with a kernel. use it. be happy.

    22. Re:Download Size by obi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, no - it's not that they want to discourage closed-source drivers, it's just that they don't want to be prisoner of this "stable api" for the sake of some closed drivers.

      They basically want to have the freedom to evolve the api as they see fit - and sometimes there's good reasons for changing it. If a stable API means being stuck with the design decisions which maybe made sense ten years ago but not anymore, I'd rather have an "unstable" API.

      So basically, if you want to provide closed drivers - feel free, but don't come crying if the API changes. But it's not like Linus' does this to deliberately sabotage closed source driver providers.

      As an aside, it's the same for people who provide open source drivers living that aren't merged with the Linux tree - they'd probably like a stable api too. In that sense they're just as screwed over or "discouraged" as the closed drivers. If they're merged, someone would probably make sure they're fixed up.

      But, if a stable API gives people the excuse to not have to maintain their drivers, then maybe we're better off without. Like when hw manufacturers decide it's not profitable to support their previous generation hardware.

    23. Re:Download Size by eraserewind · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with having a versioned API? The OS could say it implemented version 1.0 and 2.0, and 2.6.1.experimental of the device driver api. With the proviso that the obsolete versions are just wrappers onto the current official version, and won't be guarenteed work exactly 100% the same as when they used to be the official version themselves.

      I agree with the previous poster that the reason is that they want to make closed source drivers hard, and thereby encourage open source ones. Of course it's their right to to that, but many companies will never support linux as a result, which is maybe fine as far as the kernel developers are concerned, but I think that linux distribution makers should've seen the development of such a stable ABI as one of their main integration tasks.

  24. Re:Dam by jginspace · · Score: 0
    what exactly is the point of announcing minor versions on /.
    'cos it's quiet around here today. twelve hours only four stories...
  25. Re:Dam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They just said 4 on TV

    Wow. A few dozen more and they might be rivalling a day's traffic casualties. Wake me up when something newsworthy happens.

  26. Re:Dam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's also an estimated $15 billion in damage. That's a bit more than a day's worth of traffic accidents.

  27. Re:Dam by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

    ``what exactly is the point of announcing minor versions on /.?''

    I so much agree. We already have Sourceforge, Freshmeat, OSNews, and the Linux sites, etc, etc. for that, some of which you can get in slashboxes.

    But then, there was a bad screwup in this release, which does make it newsworthy.

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  28. Re:Dam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's also an estimated $15 billion in damage. That's a bit more than a day's worth of traffic accidents.

    A lot less you mean. Unless you value lives less than property.

  29. Re:Dual Boot? by dmanny · · Score: 4, Informative
    Yeah. I had that. Turns out that all I had to do was change the BIOS setting to manually for LBA instead of letting it stay as AUTO. Big deal.

    Those problems were not in the kernel per se but in the way the auxillary pieces were deployed -- mainly the boot loader.

    PS: This is being written on the system which which I had that issue. Solved now.

    --
    All my previous sigs now look like this one, I wish they were permanetly recorded when used. :-(
  30. Some hurricane news by rs79 · · Score: 1

    I know two people in that area. One has no power at home but has it at the office and has checked in via phone and this morning, email, the other isn't answering phone and their server in an indistrial strength colo is down. Jeb Bush has obtained $5M of FEMA funding.

    Watch out for snakes! (the largest reptiles expo is in Daytona starting saturday; many venomous snakes there. What an odd hobby)

    --
    Need Mercedes parts ?
    1. Re:Some hurricane news by zogger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hope your friends are ok! It's now too late in the day, my shortwave reception has dropped off. I saw some pics uploaded last night from another forum that showed some nasty destruction in I think port charlotte, someone still had net connection some how. Whole buildings smashed, etc.

      I've been through at least three I can remember the names of, agnes, frederick and opal. Agnes I though we were goners, we were supposed to evac, but all we had were bicycles so we stayed put and buttoned it down, little duplex on the beach I had with two girls, hmm, this was 72. It flooded the block and tore a lot of shingles off, etc. the next day we wandered around looking at what we called sea monsters, all kinza huge fish washed ashore and stranded. It was quite the mess. That whole neighborhood is gone now, it's all very expensive beachfront high rise hotels, etc. That was at madeira beach florida. Agnes hit much further north, we only got the sideways edge of it and it was one spooky night, tell ya what. Frederick I was living in my VW camper at the time, I stayed down at the beach as long as I could to enjoy it,sto9rms are pretty nifty if you like that sort of thing, then went inland to some campground and parked it in the middle of a field away from any trees with the windshield pointed towards the storm front. Pretty high winds but I don't think they went past 70 mph or so, so it was like driving on the freeway but sitting still except for some rocking. That was outside tampa as well. Hurricane Opal I was up in atlanta, it churned it's way a;; the way up there and knocked down thousands of trees all over, lady up the street from me had a huge tree squish her real pretty old 60's barracuda. My landlady at the time evacced to her basement, a big tree fell, penetrated her roof and drove a tree branch right through her bed where she would have been sleeping. Man, I got a lot of free woodchips and firewood after that storm, the powerline guys were begging for places to put the stuff, so I filled my driveway with it, then used it landscaping, etc. What a mess that storm was.

      I've also been through some dandy blizzards and floods and forest fires and tornadoes, which got ot be the worst I think because the destruction is so total. Seen most of the usual natural disasters except for a big earthquake, and I'll pass on that.

    2. Re:Some hurricane news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Jeb Bush has obtained $5M of FEMA funding

      Yeah, but what does rigging the election have to do with hurricanes?

  31. Re:Dual Boot? by johannesg · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    Although your answer is appreciated, it is not the answer people are looking for. Let me rephrase the question:

    I have a PC with five partitions. Two of these I use for Windows 2000. The other three are currently used for an AMD64 installation of Mandrake that doesn't have a working video card driver and is therefore almost useless to me. I'd like to install a new Linux there (in fact I need it badly), but I'm scared shitless that I may corrupt those Windows 2000 partitions and will have to spend a week rebuilding the damn thing, not to mention losing the stuff I forgot to backup. So, will any random modern distribution fuck up my Windows 2000? Or has that risk now been removed(1)? What do I need to look for in order to be able to determine this myself? See, that's the point. People are scared of losing existing partitions, and we need to know if that is going to happen or not. Whether it was caused by the kernel, the bootloader, or your uncle Vinny really isn't all that relevant.

    (1) I'm just talking about Linux here, what Windows 2000 does on its own is a completely separate subject...

  32. Re:Dam by Atzanteol · · Score: 1

    And CNN will not report on the hurricane because ABC is already reporting on it?

    --
    "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

    - Charles Darwin
  33. Re:Dam by WoodstockJeff · · Score: 1
    what exactly is the point of announcing minor versions on /.?

    It's news because 2.6.8 is the first release to include the 3ware 3w-9xxx driver I needed desparately, and it's being released just two days after decided to step back to the 2.4 kernel tree to get the machine running!

  34. Re:Dam by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

    ``And CNN will not report on the hurricane because ABC is already reporting on it?''

    No, but Animal Planet and Al Jazeera won't, because it's not their subject matter.

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  35. Fixed Ipod problems? by bach37 · · Score: 1

    From the changelog:

    From: Guennadi Liakhovetski g.liakhovetski@gmx.de
    Update the driver to use the new pci, scsi and module interfaces.

  36. Codepage for FAT by MutantEnemy · · Score: 1

    Most of the new options seem pretty normal, but can someone explain this "Default codepage for FAT" option? Cheers...

    --
    Grr! Arg!
    1. Re:Codepage for FAT by dmanny · · Score: 1

      Just a stab but I was using a FAT filesystem for mass exchange of data between Linux and WinXP apps on the same machine. I found it quite annoying that there was something screwing with the upper vs. lower case on my filenames. Windows would write upper and linux would see it as lower. I'm hoping that you are the bearer of good news.....

      --
      All my previous sigs now look like this one, I wish they were permanetly recorded when used. :-(
    2. Re:Codepage for FAT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Most of the new options seem pretty normal, but can someone explain this "Default codepage for FAT" option? Cheers...

      This one goes to the stone age of DOS... Under DOS you could write file names that included ASCII characters with codes above 127. When first localized versions of DOS appeared, you bumped into what most people still don't understand today: under your local codepage (here we used to use CP 850, US one was 437) different codes represent different characters. Since we're talking about times when Unicode was still just a thought in some lonesome head, the characters you typed for filename appeared differently when DIRed under different codepage settings.

      Now enter 21st century... most of the charcter strings are already in one or the other UCS/Unicode format. This means that we're mostly talking about Unicode character "small e with caron", not the character 152 in CP 850. The problem you have with this is to guess what was the original codepage used to write the text file or filename so you can convert from Unicode to local CP and back.

      In MS Windows this is solved by defining default system codepage. If you're a long-time MS user, then you have basicaly went all the way from the end of '80s to now using default codepages for your particular region and all this is transparent to you.

      When you come to the Linux however, what particular application considers to be your codepage has no bearing to what the kernel wants to know about you. Kernel simply doesn't do codepages. Glibc can do them, but hardware as a rule doesn't care whether it runs in China or in US. Thus, for this particular FAT problem, you have to explain the kernel module what do you consider to be a default codepage so it knows how to convert filenames from disk to userland and back.

      In short: if you live in a region that considers ISO-8859-1 to be a default, then 437 is for you, if you live somewhere else, you probably already know all this, and you have only read it this far to see if you could correct some of more glaring mistakes I have made.

      Anonymous Cowards Unite

    3. Re:Codepage for FAT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Windows would write upper and linux would see it as lower. I'm hoping that you are the bearer of good news.....

      Under MS Windows, when you write a filename that conforms into 8.3 format and consists of all upper-case characters, only basic FAT entry will be written, not the VFAT entry.

      When you list the name of such file under linux, two things happen:

      1. VFAT driver only finds 8.3 name and will ignore the case of the characters
      2. as a norm (as historicaly, under *IX platforms most of the names are lower case) all such names are displayed in lower case

      I belive that knowing this two rules, and behaviour of MS Windows, you will be able to find the solution to your problem.

      Anonymous Cowards Unite

    4. Re:Codepage for FAT by dmanny · · Score: 1
      Your explaination fits the observed behavior. I dodged using symlinks out of a ext2 fs and carried on.

      However, understanding the cause does not necessarily equate to a solution. Like most Win apps, I cannot change it much. In this case, I cannot force it to use different names. Therefore it remains a problem should I need to do that particular operation again. I would like to have an option in mounting the FAT fs under Linux. Perhaps with your info I might find one.

      Thanks

      --
      All my previous sigs now look like this one, I wish they were permanetly recorded when used. :-(
    5. Re:Codepage for FAT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, understanding the cause does not necessarily equate to a solution. Like most Win apps, I cannot change it much.

      I completely agree, however I'm reluctant to suggest any solutions without knowing complete circumstances of the problem. I find that explaining a reason for the problem usualy hepls to find the solution appropriate for your particular problem.

      Therefore it remains a problem should I need to do that particular operation again. I would like to have an option in mounting the FAT fs under Linux. Perhaps with your info I might find one.

      But better specified problem provides better solution :-)

      See man mount , search for keyword shortname . Explained in short: in fstab you can add additional option to the appropriate mount line, where you specify different value for shortname . As you already know by now, the default value is lower .

      Anonymous Cowards Unite

    6. Re:Codepage for FAT by dmanny · · Score: 1
      Thanks again. I had not yet had a chance to investigate (the real world intrudes and I am mowing the yard) but your additional info in this last post is essentially what I was expecting to find and where I was going to look.

      I ran across your new post while shutting down to reboot in the new kernel. Here goes........

      --
      All my previous sigs now look like this one, I wish they were permanetly recorded when used. :-(
    7. Re:Codepage for FAT by XaRz · · Score: 1

      You need to read the man, pal(man mount). Do it, and then you will find usefull to add in the vfat mount line of the /etc/fstab file the options: iocharset and codepage.

      Something like: /dev/hdXX..../vfat_dir......vfat.....codepage=cp85 0, iocharset=iso8859-15,.......0..0

      PS:This options for european spanish people..

    8. Re:Codepage for FAT by dmanny · · Score: 1
      Interesting. It seemed ineffective. I tried all of the available options to no avail. I verified settings changing as reported by /proc/mounts. I delierately provoked an error message by using a value not from the list. Weird.

      No time now -- will dig deeper later.

      --
      All my previous sigs now look like this one, I wish they were permanetly recorded when used. :-(
    9. Re:Codepage for FAT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No time now -- will dig deeper later.

      If you want, I can help you out via good old e-mail... Just send me a message to toshio/siol/net. I'm in EU and usualy awake between 10:00 and 23:00 GMT.

      Anonymous Cowards Unite

      Not so anonymous any more...

    10. Re:Codepage for FAT by geirhe · · Score: 1
      In short: if you live in a region that considers ISO-8859-1 to be a default, then 437 is for you, if you live somewhere else, you probably already know all this, and you have only read it this far to see if you could correct some of more glaring mistakes I have made.

      And høw wøld yø write abøøt the famøs møøse or yør cøsin Sven?

    11. Re:Codepage for FAT by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      In short: if you live in a region that considers ISO-8859-1 to be a default, then 437 is for you, if you live somewhere else, you probably already know all this, and you have only read it this far to see if you could correct some of more glaring mistakes I have made.

      I believe you mean 850, the international european codepage. 437 is US-only, and corresponds more to ASCII than Latin-1.

  37. Re:Dual Boot? by Bloater · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The OP asked if this Linux kernel version fixes the problem, the reply was that it did not involve the kernel.

    The question is answered: No, this does not fix your bootloader. Not Grub nor Partition Magic; Neither Lilo, "the bootloader that has no name", nor any other bootloader are in any way altered by this software.

  38. 2.6.8 has NFS3 problems by el-raza · · Score: 3, Informative

    people who use NFS should wait for 2.6.8.1: 2.6.8 oopses with nfs

    1. Re:2.6.8 has NFS3 problems by zhenlin · · Score: 3, Informative

      2.6.8.1 is out. But not on kernel.org frontpage.

      See http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/

  39. Re:Dam by Atzanteol · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Linux updates aren't Slashdot's subject matter?

    I hate memes as much as anybody, but... Are you new here?

    --
    "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

    - Charles Darwin
  40. Re:Dual Boot? by dmanny · · Score: 1
    You demonstrate the underlying effectiveness of FUD. Understand that I am not saying that your comments are FUD, just that the literal Fear & Uncertainty that you face is indeed paralyzing.

    Perhaps my experience might help you. I had a single WinXP partion and multiple Linux partitions on a 120G drive. When I needed to upgrade the kernel (the most current Linux installed was modified RH9) as well as several other components, I took the plunge. Because of the issues of dual boot problems having been mentioned here on /., I made sure that I had a full backup. Even though it was a 120G disk, I was able to clear out a great deal and reduced the image backup to fit on 2 DVDs.

    So, I installed. Sure enough, no XP. Dug into the situation for five minutes on the web and found the advice to change BIOS setting for the multi-boot drive to manually be LBA, as opposed to leaving in the AUTO mode. Now, previously, I would have thought that the LBA mode would have been selected by the automatic setting but, hey, the cost of trying was certainly low. Tried it, it worked.

    So, in your situation, I would be curious to hear what your backup status is. If you don't have decent backups, you are always going to be at some risk. I would go with some sort of image backup. This is easy to do if you have linux running but I gather that you may not on this box. Try using Knoppix.

    --
    All my previous sigs now look like this one, I wish they were permanetly recorded when used. :-(
  41. That all depends... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    on how, ahh, unique, is the feature you're looking for. Yes?

  42. Simple solution by T-Punkt · · Score: 1

    Isn't Linux under some source control system now?

    So you should be able to sync your local sources with a public repository at any time you want and don't havve to download huge tar files or fiddle with patches.

  43. Not updating by thephotoman · · Score: 2

    Since I'm running the 2.4 kernel without any problems, and I have had massive issues previously with a kernel update. As it is, I know I'm using a really old version of the 2.4 kernel, but I can't justify the risk in updating. I don't want to have to reformat my Linux system again.

    --
    Haec merda tauri est. Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
    1. Re:Not updating by Slack3r78 · · Score: 4, Informative

      A couple of things here. Sticking with 2.4 is reasonable, but running an old version of 2.4 is a bad idea IMO. There are enough security vulns fixed every few releases that I'd seriously consider patching, if I were you. Know how we all pick on Windows kiddes for not updating? Linux doesn't give you a free pass to run unsecure versions either.

      Second, even if a particular kernel has issues on your machine, there is *no* reason you would have to reformat. Simply create a new entry in your bootloader and leave the old Kernel as an option. That way if you forget to compile something you need in, you still have the old kernel to fall back on. This is the reason why when my laptop boots up, GRUB offers me a choice of the stock Slackware 2.4 kernel, and 4 or 5 2.6 revisions. HD space is cheap and kernel binaries are small - there's no reason not to.

    2. Re:Not updating by thephotoman · · Score: 1

      Well, when I tried updating the last time, I had a major system failure that corrupted everything. It was a massive disaster. I should say that I do patch every now and then, but updating to 2.6 is totally out of the question.

      --
      Haec merda tauri est. Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
    3. Re:Not updating by MarcQuadra · · Score: 3, Informative

      I had a manager a few years ago who got burned bad by NT service pack 5. He wouldn't let us install anything newer than SP5 in the lab. Terrible things ended up happening one day when a worm broke out and we couldn't even patch the systems because it was against policy.

      I've been through bad kernel upgrades too, but you should be fine if you follow procedure and stay conservative:

      1. get latest kernel in your tree (2.4.27 for you). It's been out a few days with no major issues. Unpack it to /usr/src/linux-2.4.27

      2. Find your current .config (/usr/src/linux/.config ?) and copy it to /usr/src/linux-2.4.27/.config

      3. cd to linux-2.4.27/ do a 'make oldconfig'. You may want to view your current .config in another window to cross-reference. You'll only have to answer questions for changes since your old config.

      4. make -j2 bzImage && make -j2 modules

      5. install the files. all this is well documented from here on, so I'll stop this, but make sure to keep your current config in your bootloader in case this kernel burns you.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
    4. Re:Not updating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I heard your frog caught on fire, and your toilet overflowed. Sorry about that.

    5. Re:Not updating by shadow_slicer · · Score: 1

      It corrupted everything? What do you mean by that?
      Would the machine not boot up (A)? Would it boot up, but all your data was gone (B)? Would it not boot up, and when you tried to roll back the update you found all your data was gone (C)?

      If (A), you should probably keep an older kernel around in you bootloader so you can roll back if the kernel didn't work. Whenever I roll my own kernel it usually takes me a couple tries before I get one that boots (I usually forget something simple like Ext3 filesystem support, or the IDE controller driver...). If you do that then this situation isn't really a disaster.

      Situation (B) and (C) are rather strange. I really don't see how this would happen short of a major fault in the kernel (the kind that doesn't leave a hacker's bench). If you're really paranoid you could create a special fstab that only mounts all the partitions as readonly. Then it would be really unlikely for the new kernel to corrupt your files. If it seems like it's working you could remount a partition you don't mind losing as rw and see if it gets corrupted. That being said I've never seen anything like this...the kernel either works or doesn't work at all.

      Although, one disaster I did run into when I initially switched to Linux was that I accidentally trashed my Windows drive. This suprised me because I was installing Linux on hdb and Windows was on hda. I think I misconfigured the bootloader, and accidentally overwrote the partition table (eek) on hda. After resetting the partition values back to something sane, Windows actually booted. Of course windows couldn't actually access files on the second half of the disk (and since the drive was pretty fragmented, that was pretty much everything). I never found the correct cylinder/head/sector/size for that harddrive, so I ended up reformating and reinstalling. (40 GB...of anime....gone =( )

    6. Re:Not updating by thephotoman · · Score: 1

      Actually, C was the case. I have no clue what happened.

      --
      Haec merda tauri est. Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
    7. Re:Not updating by thephotoman · · Score: 1

      I'll wait for 2.4.27 to hit yum. Easier that way. I've got the latest patches available through yum loaded anyway.

      --
      Haec merda tauri est. Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
    8. Re:Not updating by labradort · · Score: 1

      There are dozens of ways something can go wrong, especially if you are building a kernel yourself.

      If you are installing a kernel update (already compiled, binary files in update) from redhat or someone like that, this should be easy to do, as they automate the proceedure.

      If you are compiling your own kernel there are two rules to follow:

      1. Never overwrite the existing working kernel and /lib/module contents. Leave the existing kernel around for use in the case your new kernel won't boot the system (which can really happen if it isn't configured well). Don't over write your lilo.conf with the new entry - provide a new entry for the new kernel.

      2. Always rerun lilo when there is a new kernel to install. If you are using grub that doesn't apply, but if you are still working with 2.4, you might be looking at lilo and so this pointer might matter.

      Finally, learn about recovery methods for Linux. It is possible to make yourself a KNOPPIX cdrom (just one popular example from many available) that can be booted and used as a fully operational linux system in order to fix any grave problems on the disk version of Linux. If you prepare yourself, you should NEVER be in a situation where you lose your system from a mere kernel upgrade.

  44. men MOGET!!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FAT isn't case-sensitive. This isn't related to any codepage issues.

    You're out of luck.

    1. Re:men MOGET!!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows and DOS are not case-sensitive, but VFAT does perserve case. It just doesn't use it.

  45. Re:Dam by mailtomomo · · Score: 0

    doesn't seem to resolve my usb2.0 problems :/
    (stupid k7vt2 motherboard).

  46. Re:Dual Boot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the problem was mostly in the tools (not the kernel itself).

    I had the problem on only one of the ~10 or so computers that I setup with FC2. It turns out that a two-line 'sfdisk' command magically rewrote the partition table so that everything worked. (Without the loss of any data.)

  47. Re:Dual Boot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and the red hat installer has been fixed on FC2 since then, right? I mean, there's no way they'd just leave the ISO images that erase your windows xp partitions out there to get more bad publicity, right?

  48. Re:Dam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More interesting than the usual new US-army toy.

  49. Rsync? by msh104 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the kernel seems to have a rsync mirror. I haven't tried it yet, but that way you would be able to download the kernel in cvs style by only downloading what you need. this ofcourse only has a adventage when you download new kernel versions all the time, but most people that download from kernel.org seem to do just that. I also like the all in one package. this way I don't have bother 'bout searching for supported hardware. if it ain't in linus tree, it's not worth it for me.

    1. Re:Rsync? by johnw · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nice idea, but I haven't yet seen a kernel mirror which carries the source in plain .tar format. It's always .tar.gz and .tar.bz2.

      A specific rsync mirror which carried it as just .tar would allow what you say to work, and it should work very well. Very little management overhead to set up too (particularly compared with trying to make the source tree modular).

      John

  50. Logitech MX700 mouse by cs02rm0 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    still isn't working after anything newer that I've tried than 2.6.7-rc2. :(

    1. Re:Logitech MX700 mouse by mkosmul · · Score: 1

      What exactly isn't working ? Is the mouse not recognized by the kernel at all, or does it function but not quite correctly ? I've had some issues with another Logitech model, and it was actually XFree86/XOrg problems after all (had to manually add a "Resolution=400" line to XF86Config and it started working).

    2. Re:Logitech MX700 mouse by cs02rm0 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      It doesn't function correctly - you move the mouse around and the cursor furiously flickers around the screen.

      Xorg, Slack current.

    3. Re:Logitech MX700 mouse by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Try the stuff found in http://linux.netpimpz.com/mx700/, the very first hit on the most obvious google search.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Logitech MX700 mouse by mkosmul · · Score: 2, Informative

      In my case, it was necessary to change Protocol to "ImPS/2" (from "auto") and add Resolution=400 (actually any number was ok, as long as the line was present). With Protocol="Auto" my mouse didn't work, so changing that might help you, too.

    5. Re:Logitech MX700 mouse by cs02rm0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Thanks but neither worked. (Nor did the google suggestion from the other poster).

    6. Re:Logitech MX700 mouse by Svennig · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      I think slashdot should reverse its decision not to allow people to post AND moderate.

      I really want the mod to explain why he decided that the parent was a Troll.

      Now this post? Flaimbait probably :p

    7. Re:Logitech MX700 mouse by cs02rm0 · · Score: 1

      Yeah thanks... bit frustrating getting modded troll for something like that. Still... I made an ugly workaround:

      I copied the source from linux-2.6.7-rc2's drivers/input/mouse to the same directory in 2.6.8 - and my mouse works again! If I get a bit more time during the week I'll perhaps try and narrow it down a bit more, but the fact that I have to rebuild the nvidia graphics driver every time I rebuild the kernel is a bit of a PITA. Cheers for the help.

  51. Which kernel versions are secure? by braindead · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is there a simple way to know which kernel upgrades include security patches, and which do not? The changelogs are huge, it would be great if someone did the work and shared it with all.

    1. Re:Which kernel versions are secure? by timeOday · · Score: 1
      Unfortunately I think it's just too complicated to take changes to the kernel piecemeal. In effect you'd be creating your own version, which might have bugs of its own.

      Staying within the same series (i.e. 2.4) "shouldn't" break things. We all know that's occasionally false, but I think the best you can do is file a bug report, then stay with the older version until a newer version fixes your problem.

      Unless you have untrusted users running shell accounts on your machine, you usually don't need to upgrade your kernel. If a bug is found in sshd or apache, upgrade that package ASAP.

      The guy who started this thread said he doesn't want the possible hassle of an upgrade, and got modded "troll" for it. Huh? I know I always upgrade the kernel with some trepidation, and keep the old kernel bootable for quite a while just in case.

    2. Re:Which kernel versions are secure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry I wasn't clear. I meant to ask: "which kernel versions are safe", in the sense of "I'm running an unmodified 2.4.24, am I vulnerable to local root exploits? Remote root?" The point being that maybe I only want to upgrade the kernel if there's a serious hole in it.

      You said "Unless you have untrusted users running shell accounts on your machine, you usually don't need to upgrade your kernel". Maybe so, but I may still want to upgrade if there's a local root exploit. And I can only do that if I know which versions are vulnerable.

      Ideally, there would be a similar table for every piece of software I own... I'm dreaming, I know.

  52. Obligatory joke by Geoffd1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    2, 6, 8, who do we appreciate? Linus! Linus!

  53. Re:Dual Boot? by johannesg · · Score: 1

    Someone explain to me how a question related to the risk of installing a new kernel is offtopic in an article about that very same kernel...?

  54. Spinning down laptop drive hardly helps by timeOday · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I wonder if your laptop_mode experience is like mine - it hardly makes any difference at all? I already had cpufreq going to control cpu speed, and get good battery life from my T40. But using laptop_mode to let the disk drive spin down makes hardly any difference - at most 10 minutes on top of the normal 4 hours or so. (And I was monitoring the drive with "hdparm -C /dev/hda" to make sure it the drive really was suspended.)

    Adjusting the screen brightness makes a slightly larger difference, but not much (maybe 20 minutes between second brightest and most dim).

    What really makes the difference is CPU load. If I run a lot of cpu-intensive stuff, and let the system adaptively raise the cpu frequency to handle it, it can cut battery life by more than half! Luckly I can comfortably play movies and do word processing with the CPU locked at the slowest speed (600Mhz), but to do much development work at the same time it really helps to let the cpu ramp up.

  55. OldWorld PowerMac support? by andreyw · · Score: 1

    So, anyone successfully running a 2.6 kernel on their OldWorld powermac yet?

    While 2.4 kernels work fine, ANY 2.6 kernel (stock debian or built by myself) crashes. The system is a UMAX S900 with dual 200Mhz 604e.

    I applied some patches against QUIK to remove the kernel-size limit, but that didn't help. (But it did finally let me run 2.4.25-smp).

    1. Re:OldWorld PowerMac support? by BigBuckHunter · · Score: 1

      I have only tried it on a newworld Blue/white Imac G3. It seems to work fine, although the ALSA setup was a bit confusing.

    2. Re:OldWorld PowerMac support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, on my oldworld ppc (Powertower pro 250, single 250MHz 604e) 2.6 runs fine. I'm using YellowDog Linux 3.0, and just the plain unpatched kernels. Currently I'm running 2.6.7, but I had success with earlier 2.6 kernels as well.

      http://thomer.com/linux/migrate-to-2.6.html has some useful information how to upgrade to 2.6.

      Even x86 pc components work well, like a VIA USB 2.0 controller, PDC20269 IDE controller, Intel EtherExpress PRO 82557 and a flashed ATI Radeon 7000.

  56. Decompression time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    bzip2 is pretty much 10x slower than gzip in both compression and decompression.

    1. Re:Decompression time by AvantLegion · · Score: 1
      >> bzip2 is pretty much 10x slower than gzip in both compression and decompression.

      So? The poster was complaining about size. You either get smaller size or faster speed - you don't get both.

    2. Re:Decompression time by chefren · · Score: 1

      ??? The added decompression time for bz2 is much smaller than the added download time for gzip. So you *do* get both.

  57. So were is it? by Uteck · · Score: 1

    I just looked at kernel.org and did not see the 2.6.8.1 kernel there, only 2.6.8. So were is it? Has the webmaster been informed that his script for adding kernels broke from the new naming system?

    --
    no .sig found Please restart your browser.
  58. Re:Dual Boot? by Ultra64 · · Score: 1

    It doesn't erase Windows partitions, you just have to select LBA mode in the BIOS and it will work again.

  59. Re:Dual Boot? by j1m+5n0w · · Score: 2, Informative
    The big thing i want to know is, does this fix those problems with dual-boot that became apparent with fedora 2?

    Here's more information on the issue (which is caused by the bootloader modifying the disk geometry reported in the partition table), including how to fix it.

    -jim

  60. Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use Windows you insensitive clod!

  61. Re:Dam by Cariboo · · Score: 1

    Might as well mod this as redundant. Every time there is a kernel release somebody asks why is this here? You don't have to read it, if you are not interested in kernel releases

    I didn't see anybody complain about the minor OS upgrade that Microsoft released last week.

    There are lot of people that come to this site that are interested in kernel releases, and you do know that Slashdot was primarily a linux site when it first started

  62. Re:Dam by kan0r · · Score: 1

    We're nerds. Thats important news for us.

  63. Re:Dam by k98sven · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Um, well the point is: It doesn't happen every day does it? It's only once every few months. So it is an event, isn't it?
    At least if you're interested in Linux, which a substantial portion of the /. readership is.

    There has been a significant number of reports on Windows SP2.. I can't see the difference.

  64. seems to fix some problems by Keruo · · Score: 1

    for me, going from 2.6.7->2.6.8 fixed some nasty problems with serial ata and boot-order(via chipset)
    couldn't boot the machine at all with 2.6.7 so that it would recognize my disk controller and drive with root partition
    also the change which moved sata hds from ide to scsi devices caused some gray hair and extra work

    --
    There are no atheists when recovering from tape backup.
  65. Re:Dam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Heck, i'm filled with joy :-)

    I thought, why the f... is the 2.6.8 release posted, until you said that MY controller is supported...

    God Bless You All (in U.S.A. terms hahaha)

    Well Don't post this kind of 'news',unless it includes upgrades for MY new hardware, ever again.

    In the Netherlands whe call it cucombertime (sp?, dutch: komkommertijd ... = The time of year that the newspapers have stories like: 'New York Fire Department saved cat out of tree', and 'John Petersen got an A+ on his mathematics test' in the New York Times)

  66. Re:who gives a shit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously, not you. Then again you're going to end up with severe intestinal problems, so no one cares about you either.

    P.S. Call us back when you figure out the correct use of the shift key(s).

  67. Why use Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've always wondered why people use Linux. Why pay $699 for a so-called "operating system" when you get Windows pre-installed for free with every computer you buy? And why pay for a system that requires you to compile every program before you run it and doesn't even come with sound card drivers? I think all these Linux fan-boys are really that SCO astroturfing we have been warned about!

  68. Oh for Christ's sake by vandan · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I see that many people have beaten me to it and educated you about the existance of patches, but ... well ... I just can't help myself.

    You, sir, are a moron.

  69. Re:linux is Shit - get over yourselves. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OOoohhh!! I bet you use OpenBSD you leet script kiddie, you. Suck my sweaty balls.

    And WTF is with your capitalisation? You must be an illiterate redneck.

  70. VIA ACPI/APIC support by red+floyd · · Score: 1

    Anyone know if the issues with VIA chipsets, ACPI and APIC were resolved between 2.6.3 and 2.6.8?

    Running a K7T266A, I had do disable ACPI, APIC, and Local APIC, or I'd get hangups and USB wouldn't work.

    --
    The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    1. Re:VIA ACPI/APIC support by benjamindees · · Score: 1
      Maybe, I haven't tried it, but this is in the 2.6.8 changelog:
      [PATCH] bug in V-link handling (arch/i386/pci/irq.c)

      Via southbridges use register 0x3c of the on-board devices (USB and AC97) to control interrupt routing for those. In drivers/pci/quirks.c we set it correctly (dev->irq & 15). However, in pirq_enable_irq() where the second half of that stuff lives, we forget to apply the mask.

      That's what causes problems with ioapic on via motherboards in 2.6.
      One-liner below ACKed by Alan, verified on via-based boxen here, obviously doesn't affect non-via ones (we only set interrupt_line_quirk for via chipsets).
      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    2. Re:VIA ACPI/APIC support by red+floyd · · Score: 1

      Thanks, Benjamin!

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
  71. seems to fix some problems-And then some. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well under Mandrake 10, going from kernel-2.6.8.0.rc2.2mdk to 2.6.8.0.rc4.1mdk will cause all sorts of problems (hang at cups starting. Hang at X starting). I've found with some experimenting that it locks up the keyboard when dm starts. Otherwise runlevel three is fine.

  72. 2.6.8.1 by linuxmankev · · Score: 1

    Oops, bit of a cock up in the NFS Client code... so much it warranted a mini-minor version... http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/Change Log-2.6.8.1 I'll agree with others... I'm awaiting 2.6.8.SP2 :)

  73. Re:linux is Shit - get over yourselves. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, actually I'm not.
    I prefer to write like one though.

  74. Re:who gives a shit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Severe intestinal problems? ... from laughing at linux users?

  75. Re:Dam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Dam

    What does Linux have to do with something that holds-back water?