Slashdot Mirror


2.6.13 Linux Kernel Released

LynuxFre@k writes "Linux Torvalds announced the release of the 2.6.13 Linux kernel. He noted that there was a major change to the x86 PCI code, and that while all bugs from the change were believed to be found during the release candidate phase, it's possible that some devices may have problems. From this release on, it is intended that major changes only be merged into the kernel within two weeks after a major release. The rest of the time will be spent fixing bugs, with the goal of both increasing overall stability and decreasing the amount of time between major releases. Download the latest Linux kernel from a kernel.org mirror."

20 of 464 comments (clear)

  1. Linux Torvalds by The+New+Andy · · Score: 4, Funny
    I'm sure there is a witty comment to make about the fact that the very first word in the article summary is wrong, but I can't quite fit it all together.

    I'm not really a grammar/spelling/correctness nazi either, so I can't really complain about slashdot going down hill. I just feel compelled to post.

    Uh... I wish my name was Linux?

    1. Re:Linux Torvalds by carndearg · · Score: 4, Funny

      Uh... I wish my name was Linux? No y'dont. You'd have Aussie lawyers after you for licencing fees!

  2. Linus, not Linux by altanhaider · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's LINUS Torvalds. God, I hate reading typoes!

  3. Re:kernel bug fixes by Knome_fan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't really understand why so many people have a problem with the current policy and the policy changes.

    What exactly is wrong with refining the development process?

  4. Ahem... by dwalsh · · Score: 5, Funny

    2.6.13 Linux(TM) kernel

    --
    ${YEAR+1} is going to be the year of Linux on the desktop!
  5. Re:kernel bug fixes by 10Ghz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not THAT bad. Revision control system has been changed twice during the lifetime of the kernel. Developement-method has been changed once, and now that method is simply being tweaked a bit. And what do you care how they develop the kernel? Are you are kernel-developer?

    Or how would you like them to do it? "We will do things this way, and by god, we will do it like this untill the end of time! Even if better ways of doing this comes along, we will not change our ways!"

    --
    Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
  6. Hey! It's not Linux Torvalds... by yogix · · Score: 5, Funny


    ... it's GNU/Linux Torvalds!

    - RMS

  7. Re:How about a stable ABI? by erlenic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'll give you my opinions on these.

    A) It's been years since I've recompiled a kernel, and I've only compiled a few software packages in years. I use Linux daily at work, and exclusively at home. It may not be as easy to install software as on a Mac, but a good distro is equal to Windows.

    B) I agree, but at the same time I find it rare that I have to drop to a command line to do normal computing tasks. I still go there daily, but by choice.

    C) I can usually find anything I need online without having to post to a message board myself. However, I do agree that it needs significant improvement. I wouldn't expect non-technical people to search online for their answers.

    By the way, you should find other examples to "prove" your technical skill. Ripping videos and using Photoshop aren't too "technical" in nature, especially here. Alternatively, don't try to prove it, just leave it assumed. Note: I'm not calling your knowledge into question, just your examples.

  8. Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful
    You cannot admit that no one in their right mind would do professional video editing in Linux.


    Industry standard 3d, compositing and editing tools all run under linux which is the natural progression because of their IRIX legacy.

    I've also done some DTP under linux but that probably wasn't professional, since I didn't just bang a series of poorly masked raster images together like most 'professional' agencies we dealt with.

    Does this make me a linux fanatic?

  9. Devfs removed by Saiyine · · Score: 5, Informative


    As they say in osnews, devfs seems to have been removed from the kernel.

    --
    Dreamhost superb hosting.
    Kunowalls!!! Random sexy wallpapers (NSFW!).

    --
    Hosting 20G hd, 1Tb bw! ssh $7.95
    1. Re:Devfs removed by diegocgteleline.es · · Score: 4, Informative

      not that many people is going to notice it - devfs wasn't really used in most of mainstream distros except 2 or 3. In some cases like Mandrake, they used it and then switched back.

      And it's not a surprise, linux's devfs implementation was broken from start, and the idea behind devfs isn't a relly good one. Fortunately, udev is much better...

    2. Re:Devfs removed by diegocgteleline.es · · Score: 4, Insightful

      These discussions along with final reason for pushing udev were concentrated on devfs weaknesses rather than udev superiority.

      udev pushes all the device naming policy to userspace. Moving policy stuff to userspace is something that linux developers (and hackers of other OSes too) love because it's a much better design. That was the main reason for udev.

  10. More kernel crashes as of late? by suso · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've been using Linux since 2.0.27. It has usually been generally quite stable for me. But recently, I've been encountering more and more kernel crashes. For trivial things to, like a kernel crash when I try to use ifconfig yesterday when setting up a machine. And random crashes on one of my servers that doesn't seem related to RAM. I know that some kernel versions have "problems", but it seems to be more than that. A recent trend of unstability. Can anyone else who has been using Linux for a significant amount of time attest to this?

    1. Re:More kernel crashes as of late? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, unfortunately I have the same experience. I used to rely on the vanilla Linux kernel tree being rock solid. Now I feel I must stay many months behind in order to avoid potentially catastrophic problems. Considering the number of bug fixes, particularly w/ regard to security, that can show up in new kernel releases, it's not an ideal situation: you're damned if you do, and you're damned if you don't.

      I've recently had networking go south when packets were being written to localhost. Some adaptec scsi stuff was recently messed up, apparently now fixed in 2.6.13 - but no way I'm going to try it until it's been out for a while. I've seen problems with quotas in combination with ext3. I recently started experiencing connection tracking weirdnesses with an iptables setup I've used at home for probably a couple of years. I've seen versions where network latencies would grow ever so slowly until they reached a critical threshold that sent my server(s) spiraling into oblivion. Yes, I file bug reports. Yes, problems get fixed. But at the same time, new ones show up. Sometimes bad ones.

      I've become accustomed to rebooting Windows to fix problems, but that's exactly why I use Linux - because it was rock solid. I won't say that anymore, and it bums me out big time. I like new shiny objects too, but not at the expense of stability. Especially not on servers, which is where Linux has made the most headway.

      The problem with the current versioning system is that even if there is a bug-fix only decimal release, and even if there is only a two week window to introduce new features, the bug fixing won't get done. Why? Because new features are more fun than fixing bugs. Even if I can't submit a new feature until several months from now, that doesn't mean I won't work on it in leiu of fixing bugs.

      Linus should freeze the 2.6 kernel series against *any* new features at all, for a period of about a year. All work should be on increasing stability, ironing out bugs, improving device drivers, and other such menial housekeeping. The kernel contributers who really buck up, get to work, and help with this effort should get big karma bonuses from Linus. Those who hang back and work on their own thing should be pushed down a level in future kernel submission evaluations.

      Sorry to be so negative, but I really hope this gets better. I'm a huge fan, but I have been wasting way too much time lately dealing with problems that end up being way beyond my control. When there is a problem with my systems, I want it to be my fault, because then I can do something about it.

    2. Re:More kernel crashes as of late? by hackstraw · · Score: 4, Informative


      Are these crashes repeatable or do they have any kind of similarity?

      I've been using Linux since 0.9x, and its been very stable for me over the years with a few exceptions that were experienced by other people as well.

      My first assumption when I have a seemingly random kernel crash with no meaningful data from the OOPs or other messages is that there is a problem with my hardware.

      For me, the Linux kernel is more robust than electrical power or hardware.

      YMMV.

    3. Re:More kernel crashes as of late? by bfields · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I've been using Linux since 2.0.27. It has usually been generally quite stable for me. But recently, I've been encountering more and more kernel crashes.... Can anyone else who has been using Linux for a significant amount of time attest to this?

      Not me.

      But it's very hard to generalize from one person's experience to any general "recent trend of unstability." Most of the bugs are in drivers, so people's experiences tend to be highly dependent on exactly which hardware they have.

      --Bruce Fields

  11. Re:How about a stable ABI? by ledow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A) Fine. So we'll distribute one binary version of the kernel. It won't work as fast. It'll be hundreds of megs in size. It will take ages to load as it checks for every single known piece of hardware. You've just lost all the speed/memory advantage of having a tailored kernel. Alternatively, it'll come with a hundred modules. It'll also never be x64 optimised or, for that matter, able to work on every machine (some options crash some machines, while the opposite options may crash others) and APM/ACPI will NEVER work on some machines.

    B) Fine. You come up with a GUI that can allow me to find files modified on the second Tuesday of every month between May 1, 1946 and June 27, 1978, which contain the words 'secret' and 'report' within 26 characters of each other, sort them by date, and replace any occurence of the word 'anchovie' by 'dead bug'. Some things GUI's just cannot do, some things GUI's do that are just command line interfaces in a fancy coloured textbox, some things GUI's can do once in the time that someone who knows the command can do twenty times.

    Secondly, how do you expect a GUI to be able to do stuff like modify computer internals safely? Windows answer to this is usually that settings won't take effect until the next reboot, which makes your computer *stop all it's work* until it's done. X can be restarted with a single keystroke to have the same effect. Maybe a couple of command line edits in between but meanwhile none of your users have been disconnected, no programs have stopped doing what they were supposed to be doing.

    Command-lines are not for the faint-of-heart. Then again, last time I touched the command line on my own Linux desktop (not counting other machines that are cmd-line only via SSH) was to run LILO - not something that a "desktop doughnut" should be doing. You obviously have either different ideas of what you should be doing on a normal desktop machine or have not found out how to do them GUI-wise. By the same token, Windows should never expect me to recover in safe mode, or via recovery console, or by running any batch commands ever. Fine for the ordinary desktop user because it very rarely does. Not fine for a power user. An ordinary desktop user wouldn't even notice if you ran a Windows GUI on a Linux machine.

    C) Man pages can be a pain in the arse (make it compulsory to include enough examples to demonstrate every option!). HOWTO's are not always up-to-date. Forums are, pretty much, for people who want to know how to install this Linux thing they downloaded. Then again... how much documentation do you get with Windows?

    A small booklet showing you how to use a mouse to point at the various icons. An online help system that, even with it's wizard-style help for some items, is next to useless if you don't know the terms to look for (I work support for six schools... that's about 60-100 staff and a few thousand pupils. I have NEVER seen or heard of anyone even bother to try using Windows Help or Help inside ANY program because it's never been useful to them). Annoying dogs, wizards, paperclips that people want me to TURN OFF for them because they can't figure out how.

    That's surely Linux 0-0 Windows in terms of help.

    If you're an advanced user, you've got to be comfortable with the command-line. I carry a USB key full of cmd-line utils and use them almost every day on Windows and Linux. It's amazing how much quicker "Start, Run, Cmd, ipconfig" is than navigating that poxy GUI network settings. And while I'm there, doing "route print" is the ONLY way to discover Windows network routes.

    Anyone who's not going to set up networks or advanced stuff (i.e. users), or home users shouldn't ever NEED to worry about the command line on either OS. And they don't. They pick a distro like Lindows and once the installation is complete, they never see it again. Or they have a decent desktop set up and then never see the command-line again. You, however, are on the border. You are trying to do stuff that NEEDS a command line, stuff that's beyond a GUI point-and-click.

  12. Summary of new features by makomk · · Score: 4, Informative

    There's a good summary of the new features over at LWN. Among other things, inotify has finally been merged in - about time! I wonder when Gentoo will add the new version to Portage, and if I'll dare to upgrade?

  13. Re:Coral by LnxAddct · · Score: 5, Informative

    You're kidding right? A kernel release like this doesn't even make kernel.org break a sweat. Read this. The only time they ever even start to see some strain on their bandwidth is with a new release of Fedora, because they are a mirror for it (both of their gigabit links become saturated). For kernel releases though, they say that their bandwidth stays pretty normal at around 150Mbps to 200Mbps.
    Regrds,
    Steve

  14. Re:kernel bug fixes by m50d · · Score: 4, Interesting
    And what do you care how they develop the kernel?

    I care about the results, and so far the 2.6 tree has produced a grand total of one kernel that actually works for me (2.6.11). And the obvious cause, rightly or wrongly, seems to be Linus messing around with the development process.

    Or how would you like them to do it? "We will do things this way, and by god, we will do it like this untill the end of time! Even if better ways of doing this comes along, we will not change our ways!"

    How about "We will change things only when the alternative has been shown to be unambiguously better on a smaller project, and only when changing major versions". I believe in experimentation but the kernel is such an important project that a bit more conservatism is called for.

    --
    I am trolling