Linux Kernel 2.6.20 Released

diegocgteleline.es writes "After two months of development, Linux 2.6.20 has been released. This release includes two different virtualization implementations: KVM: full-virtualization capabilities using Intel/AMD virtualization extensions and a paravirtualization implementation usable by different hypervisors. Additionally, 2.6.20 includes PS3 support, a fault injection debugging feature, UDP-lite support, better per-process IO accounting, relative atime, relocatable x86 kernel, some x86 microoptimizations, lockless radix-tree readside, shared pagetables for hugetbl, and many other things. Read the list of changes for more details."

Comments

so

[Anonymous Coward]

how much of SCO's stolen code is in this version?

Re:so

[IdleTime]

42...

Re:so

[jd]

Are you accusing Linus of jumping the gun? We all know from court statements that the stolen code isn't to be added until Linux 2.7!

Re:so

[rucs_hack]

surely you mean 6*9....

Re:so

[Tribbin]

Either you don't get the joke, or I don't get yours.

42 was chosen for its deep philosophical significance.

Re:so

[rucs_hack]

ok then, I elaborate.

'what do you get if you multiply six by nine'
'forty two'

A little adams humour...

Re:so

[644bd346996]

Shame on you for forgetting the scrabble tiles!

"What do you get if you multiply six by nine" from The Resturant at the End of the Universe Chapter 33.

Re:so

[Anonymous Coward]

Tons, tons and tons. All what is not OS/2 or MSDOS 5 code is SCO code LOL

SCO?

[LinuxGeek]

Now, these are the features that should make SCOX afraid for their companies value.

Pretty amusing superbowl announcement

[reset_button]

In a widely anticipated move, Linux "headcase" Torvalds today announced
the immediate availability of the most advanced Linux kernel to date,
version 2.6.20.

Before downloading the actual new kernel, most avid kernel hackers have
been involved in a 2-hour pre-kernel-compilation count-down, with some
even spending the preceding week doing typing exercises and reciting PI
to a thousand decimal places.

The half-time entertainment is provided by randomly inserted trivial
syntax errors that nerds are expected to fix at home before completing
the compile, but most people actually seem to mostly enjoy watching the
compile warnings, sponsored by Anheuser-Busch, scroll past.

As ICD head analyst Walter Dickweed put it: "Releasing a new kernel on
Superbowl Sunday means that the important 'pasty white nerd'
constituency finally has something to do while the rest of the country
sits comatose in front of their 65" plasma screens".

Walter was immediately attacked for his racist and insensitive remarks
by Geeks without Borders representative Marilyn vos Savant, who pointed
out that not all of their members are either pasty nor white. "Some of
them even shower!" she added, claiming that the constant stereotyping
hurts nerds' standing in society.

Geeks outside the US were just confused about the whole issue, and were
heard wondering what the big hoopla was all about. Some of the more
culturally aware of them were heard snickering about balls that weren't
even round.

                                            Linus

Re:Pretty amusing superbowl announcement

[itsdave]

hilarious.

Re:Pretty amusing superbowl announcement

[IdleTime]

Ahhhh... yes... The National Championship in Armpitoval!

Re:Pretty amusing superbowl announcement

[oever]

For those of us outside of the US: Anheuser-Busch is a brewery conglomerate, probably a bit like Bavaria.

Re:Pretty amusing superbowl announcement

[kfg]

"Releasing a new kernel on Superbowl Sunday . . .

Is it really? Go figure. Packers must not be in it or I would have heard about it already (it's a work thing). I've even had the TV on for a few hours today and didn't see anything about it. I must watch the right channels or something.

KFG

Re:Pretty amusing superbowl announcement

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah yes. I'd forgotten about that silly game you Americans play ...

Rugby: A thug's game played by gentlemen
Soccer: A gentleman's game played by thugs
American football: A moron's game played by morons

Re:Pretty amusing superbowl announcement

[that this is not und]

I am sitting here in central Indiana (middle of the midwest) drinking a Newcastle Brown Ale, and have no plan to turn on the TV set at all tonight.

(scans label on bottle nervously to make sure Newcastle Brown Ale hasn't been taken over and become something brewed by Anheuser-Busch in St. Louis or somewhere)

Re:Pretty amusing superbowl announcement

[Marcos Eliziario]

Considering that you are brave enough to spill your racism here without showing your face you must be ....

Re:Pretty amusing superbowl announcement

[tenco]

For those of you outside of Germany: Bavaria is a state of Germany. It even contains more beer than any brewery conglomerate...

Re:Pretty amusing superbowl announcement

[ewanm89]

Who own those plasma screens? A 70" will do me nicely. :-)

Hard Work

[bigtomrodney]

It's great to see the work done for the Cell processor and for the PS3, but unfortunately I get the feeling that there won't be a huge amount of interest until it is used to either run Pirated games or circumvent DRM. Still it's a credit to the developers to have this much work done, and before Europe has even seen the PS3 released.

Re:Hard Work

[__aaijsn7246]

Most of the work was done by IBM for their QS20 Cell blade.

Too many tlas?

[Professr3]

Where would we be without lockless radix-free readsides? I don't even know what that means, and I'm a CS major!

Re:Too many tlas?

[SixDimensionalArray]

I admit to not knowing what they are either, but here it is - radix tree. Sounds like a pretty nice tree data structure, an alternative to your hashtables, balanced trees, etc. designed for sets of strings.

Since I love the PHP and PERL implementations of associate arrays, I guess it's neat to have these data structures implemented directly in the kernel! Sounds like they might be using them as a sort of in-memory data store.

SixD

Re:Too many tlas?

[xenocide2]

This comment hurts my brain. You bitch about TLAs but they're not even acronyms. Do you even know what TLA stands for?!

Lockless means it's doing something without locking everyone else from the data. Sometimes this means optimistic resolution (everyone try, and if it looks like it screwed up, try again!), sometimes it means keeping local read copies, sometimes it means something new and/or crazy. Lockless approaches are used when you have data that lots of threads must share but efficiency concerns or non-blocking requirements force you away from simply using a lock and blocking when someone else is playing with the data.

A radix-tree, as opposed to "radix-free", is a data structure used in certain applications, with operations dependent on the length of the key rather than the amount of data stored. In 2.6.20 (and others), it's used to organize some information about the page cache.

This code is associated with the RCU, which you may recall is part of an SCO lawsuit. If you're interested in any other feature or changes, the kernel newbies site is instrumental!

Re:Too many tlas?

[Professr3]

Oi, I was merely making a joke. No need to crucify me!

Re:Too many tlas?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oooh, I see, you're still under the illusion that majoring in something in college means you "know" it. Don't worry, you'll figure out the truth soon.

Re:Too many tlas?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hold hard there, crazy steve, ever heard of a joke?

Re:Too many tlas?

[enrgeeman]

odd, I always thoought the A in TLA stood for abbreviations, not acronyms...

Re:Too many tlas?

[xenocide2]

Sure, I got the joke. The bit about the TLAs just irked me. And you knew someone had to reply with a straight answer so I figured "Why not me?" ;)

Re:Too many tlas?

[aug24]

Aw, come one, give the buy a break cos he's clearly not that clever. He can't even (sort of) spell 'Profess3r'.

Justin.

Re:Too many tlas?

[arodland]

This is PERL. This is Perl. See the difference? Good.

Wow, kernel 2.6.20

[Anonymous Coward]

and still no way to "pause" a process without sending it the STOP signal.

Re:Wow, kernel 2.6.20

[rangek]

and still no way to "pause" a process without sending it the STOP signal.

Huh? What's wrong with STOP?

Re:Wow, kernel 2.6.20

[Anonymous Coward]

The STOP signal will cause the parent shell to display a command prompt. If there were any keystrokes pending in that shell, they'll be typed, potentially running a command immediately instead of running it only after completion of the job we just stopped. This could be wrong.

Re:Wow, kernel 2.6.20

[rangek]

The STOP signal will cause the parent shell to display a command prompt. If there were any keystrokes pending in that shell, they'll be typed, potentially running a command immediately instead of running it only after completion of the job we just stopped. This could be wrong.

Sounds like a shell problem rather than a kernel problem. Who is STOPping jobs in an interactive shell that someone is typing in anyway? Hrm. The more I think about it the more this doesn't seem right. I am sure I have STOPed calculations launched by a shell script and the script didn't continue. It waited for the STOPed job to continue, finish, and then the rest ran...

Meta-Dupe?

[Anonymous Coward]

See: http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/31/ 154224:

"The Linux 2.6.20 kernel will feature KVM support, Playstation 3 support, and a variety of other improvements. With the Linux 2.6.20-rc6 kernel out the door, Phoronix has written a performance comparison of the Linux 2.6.20-rc6 kernel against the 2.6.19 and 2.6.19.2 kernels in a variety of benchmarks." Okay, so it went from release candidate to release. Still reads like a dupe to me.

Relocatable on x86?

[MBCook]

What is the purpose of being relocatable on x86? I don't remember reading anything about that so what is the point? Is that already possible on other architectures or is x86 the first (as it often is)? I realize the point of making user programs relocatable, but the kernel? The only thing I can think of is that this either has to do with paravirtualization (to speed it up when the kernel isn't at the base of address space), or for replacing the kernel on a running system (can't remember the name, but the idea would be to load the new kernel, transfer into it, then copy it down to the base of memory as you're executing).

Can any explain this one to me?

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[shaitand]

Read the fucking changes. They explain it there. That isn't a link to the usual changelog; it is actually readable.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[Anonymous Coward]

"readable" yeah.. slashdotted

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[diegocgteleline.es]

It's useful for kdump users. Kdump uses kexec to execute a new kernel in a non-standard localization of the memory. Until now kdump people used a different kernel that was compiled to be run in a different memory localization from the standard one. With this feature, you can use the same kernel to do a standard booting and a kexec boot without carring a additional kernel image around.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[shaitand]

Since pointing people to the relevent document is apparently flamebait; I will copy and paste what you get if you click on the fourth heading in giant print from the changes article.

Relocatable kernel support for x86

This feature (enabled with CONFIG_RELOCATABLE) isn't very noticeable for end-users but it's quite interesting from a kernel POV. Until now, it was a requeriment that a i386 kernel was loaded at a fixed memory address in order to work, loading it in a different place wouldn't work. This feature allows to compile a kernel that can be loaded at different 4K-aligned addresses, but always below 1 GB, with no runtime overhead. Kdump users (a feature introduced in 2.6.13 that it triggers kexec in a kernel crash in order to boot a kernel that has been previously loaded at a 'empty' address, then runs that kernel, saves the memory where the crashed kernel was placed, dumps it in a file and continues booting the system) will benefit from this because until now the "rescue kernel" need to be compiled with different configuration options in order to make it bootable at a different address. With a relocatable kernel, the same kernel can be boot at different addresses.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[FooAtWFU]

This feature (enabled with CONFIG_RELOCATABLE) isn't very noticeable for end-users but it's quite interesting from a kernel POV. Until now, it was a requeriment that a i386 kernel was loaded at a fixed memory address in order to work, loading it in a different place wouldn't work. This feature allows to compile a kernel that can be loaded at different 4K-aligned addresses, but always below 1 GB, with no runtime overhead. Kdump users (a feature introduced in 2.6.13 that it triggers kexec in a kernel crash in order to boot a kernel that has been previously loaded at a 'empty' address, then runs that kernel, saves the memory where the crashed kernel was placed, dumps it in a file and continues booting the system) will benefit from this because until now the "rescue kernel" need to be compiled with different configuration options in order to make it bootable at a different address. With a relocatable kernel, the same kernel can be boot at different addresses.

Mirrordot has a copy you can read.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[iluvcapra]

Every time you say "RTFM n00b," God kills a prospective Linux switcher. Cheers.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[Anonymous Coward]

..and you say this like its a bad thing, or that slashdot is personally responsible for linux adoption. get over yourself, seriously.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[shaitand]

That doesn't really apply here. He doesn't sound like a n00b to me. He sounds like a competent individual with a question about the details who was just too damn lazy to actually follow the link in the summary for those details. I also helpfully advised him that those details were readable and not a bland changelog litany in case he assumed that is what he would find and skipped it for that reason.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[pboyd2004]

Among the other things mentioned here. It's actually somewhat of a security thing. A lot of root kits and other exploits rely on fixed addresses so if you move the kernel or other parts of the OS around it's harder to hack.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Since pointing people to the relevent document is apparently flamebait"

Hint, it's the word "fucking" that made you seem aggressive and earnt you a flamebait moderation. I'm not going to discuss the logic or consistency of this, because there isn't any. Social behaviours are just something you have to learn and live with if you want to interact with others.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[jZnat]

Prospective Linux users definitely aren't interested in this sort of thing (unless they're a kernel developer or CS major/student not currently using Linux), so I don't see how this applies...

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[Nutria]

Among the other things mentioned here. It's actually somewhat of a security thing. A lot of root kits and other exploits rely on fixed addresses so if you move the kernel or other parts of the OS around it's harder to hack.

Well hell, why didn't they mention that on kernelnewbies? It would have perked up everyone's ears, even those of us who don't know what kexec is.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[node 3]

That doesn't really apply here. He doesn't sound like a n00b to me. Maybe, maybe not (are you certain? doubtful). But either way, there *are* going to be n00bs reading the question, followed by your (essentially) RTFA answer.

Granted, you did put in effort to avoid sounding like you're just saying RTFA, but in the end, that's exactly what you said. Your post would definitely be helpful for the avid reader who really just needed that little push, but I agree with iluvcapra, your answer will really be off-putting for the potential Linux n00b. All your (commendable) efforts to mitigate that issue don't change that simple dynamic.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[shaitand]

We are straying off-topic here but I still must say this. Reading your post it sounds as if there is never a situation where it is appropriate to refer someone to the manual at all. It is generally inappropriate to slap a 600 page book in front of someone in response to a question but when the answer to their question is contained in the title it is a different story. RTFM is only inappropriate when directed at someone who is making a legitimate effort. It is still the correct response for those who want free support in lieu of reading the documentation.

Someone who didn't read the link they were referred to because experience caused them to anticipate a changelog would be justified. Everyone else (regardless of their n00bishness) deserves a RTFM response. RTFM is only wrong if it directed at someone who is making a legitimate effort, it is the correct response to give someone who is seeking free support in lieu of reading documentation.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[node 3]

RTFM is only inappropriate when directed at someone who is making a legitimate effort. If a n00b, who is curious about Linux but is not making a "legitimate effort", hears "RTFM" (or "RTFA", in this case), and is put off Linux, possibly forever, is that appropriate?

The thing that made your answer so shitty and arrogant was, while it was clear you were *trying* to be helpful, you wrote a very long, "RTFA", which did not answer the question at all, and even worse, was much longer than an actual, helpful, answer would have been.

Reading your post it sounds as if there is never a situation where it is appropriate to refer someone to the manual at all. Where did you get that idea? I never said anything of the sort.

You've really got to consider how your help is going to be received (if your goal is actually to help, which it's clear it was). If someone asks a question, and you answer with a smart-ass riddle, most of the time all you're doing is annoying the person, and not helping at all. RTFM is a lot like answering with a riddle (although much more straightforward). If their question is really complex, sometimes RTFM is the shorter, easier answer. If they show keen interest, sometimes RTFM is the most helpful answer (pointing them where they can learn much more than just the answer to their single question). And sometimes RTFM teaches people to be self-sufficient.

On the other hand, sometimes RTFM sounds too much like, "I could tell you, but I won't. You're on your own, n00b." Why expect the casual observer to respond well to that?

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[gkhan1]

Since pointing people to the relevent document is apparently flamebait

No, but being rude and obnoxious can certainly qualify as flamebait. If you don't want to be modded down, learn some civility. And by the way, bitching about moderation is off-topic.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[shaitand]

'If a n00b, who is curious about Linux but is not making a "legitimate effort", hears "RTFM" (or "RTFA", in this case), and is put off Linux, possibly forever, is that appropriate?'

Yup. Perhaps you want to see freeloaders of that sort in the linux community or the computing world in general for that matter but I do not.

'Where did you get that idea? I never said anything of the sort.'

You said it by implication. If it is not appropriate to refer someone, someone that has enough technical knowledge to ask a question that could only interest the technically literate in the first place, back to the article (which they have already been referred to for their answer) then there is never an appropriate time. Particularly when the answer they seek is found at the beginning of the article with a heading that could not be misunderstood that makes clear it is found there in rather large pronounced bold letters.

'You've really got to consider how your help is going to be received (if your goal is actually to help, which it's clear it was).'

My goal was mixed. Ultimately, yes I wanted to help and did in fact provide the answer. There is no way that following my referal could have failed to yield the answer. But I certainly intended to reprimand as well. The question was on the par of asking how to construct a paper airplane immediately after seeing 10 posts pointing to articles on paper airplane making. The poster just wanted someone else to look for him. The only reason I answered at all is because I am a fairly lazy individual myself.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[shaitand]

'No, but being rude and obnoxious can certainly qualify as flamebait'

Only if you are wrong. Unless you mean the language. If you have some sort of illogical emotion that supports a belief in 'bad' language then you should read and post on a family forum.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[gkhan1]

No... being rude and obnoxious is bad irrelevant of whether you are right or wrong. I don't care about the specific words you use, I have no problem with 'bad' language. However, if you want to be taken seriously, you'd better learn the rules of civil discourse. One of the moderation systems purposes is to raise the level of discussion, so that debating can occur at a sophisticated level. Not slapfights and name-calling.

You didn't learn that and you got modded down. Stop complaining, and learn the rules.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[shaitand]

'One of the moderation systems purposes is to raise the level of discussion, so that debating can occur at a sophisticated level. Not slapfights and name-calling.'

As a consistent moderator let me assist you. The purpose of moderation is to raise the level of discussion by highlighting unique and constructive comments. The purpose of moderation is NOT to highlight or silence those the mods do not feel were civil while making undeniably constructive comments that add to the discussion.

I do find it highly amusing that you would compare my constructive comments with name-calling because you did not appreciate the tone. The amusing part is that throughout this offtopic subthread you started; the only actual content in your posts has been to call me rude and obnoxious and then attempt to defend your supposedly righteous name-calling.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[Anonymous Coward]

I do find it highly amusing that you would compare my constructive comments with name-calling because you did not appreciate the tone. The amusing part is that throughout this offtopic subthread you started; the only actual content in your posts has been to call me rude and obnoxious and then attempt to defend your supposedly righteous name-calling.

Asshole.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you a kdump user? Wanna talk about it?

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe he just wanted someone else's view on the topic? I really hate it when people use the RTFM response, why bother responding with a useless response?

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[rancher dan 3]

God I love it when geeks talk dirty.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[drinkypoo]

If a n00b, who is curious about Linux but is not making a "legitimate effort", hears "RTFM" (or "RTFA", in this case), and is put off Linux, possibly forever, is that appropriate?

Some newbie who is put off Linux forever by being told to RTF[AM] isn't going to last five minutes anyway.

The thing that made your answer so shitty and arrogant was, while it was clear you were *trying* to be helpful, you wrote a very long, "RTFA", which did not answer the question at all, and even worse, was much longer than an actual, helpful, answer would have been.

Arrogant? Sure. Shitty? He provided a link to the answer. This site is supposed to be news for nerds, not news for noobs. If you can't handle an RTFM, you're not qualified to be a nerd. Turn in your card on the way out, and don't let the good lord hit you where the good lord split you.

You know what makes a nerd (or as we say where I come from, a geek)? That driving desire to figure things out. An actual nerd would have noticed that there's this wonderful thing called google that quite frankly could have answered the same questions. This utter reliance on everyone else to explain things all the time is not very nerdly.

You've really got to consider how your help is going to be received

Some of us only care so much. We care enough to help, but not enough to restrain ourselves from explaining to people how we feel and why.

On the other hand, sometimes RTFM sounds too much like, "I could tell you, but I won't. You're on your own, n00b." Why expect the casual observer to respond well to that?

Why would the casual wannabe-geek be on slashdot?

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[shaitand]

There is nothing useless about pointing someone directly at the information they are seeking. If someone asks you how the whole molecular biology thing works and you refer them to a specific book or course; was your answer useless? Of course not, you just told them to RTFM. If they aren't happy with that then tough, you do not exist to teach them molecular biology. They should be grateful that you were willing to set them on the right path to learn for themselves.

RTFM gained common usage because the vast amount of questions that grounded in ignorance. Rather than explain why the question either doesn't make sense or is a bad question; it is easier to direct someone to the appropriate documentation so they can come back with real questions later. There are 4000 questioners and 5 question answerers, RTFM (when the answer is contained in the table of contents or with direction to the appropriate place if it is not) is a way to rapidly deliver all the information a questioner needs and to be able to answer more questions.

Amazing

[Anonymous Coward]

Shows that all the innovation is happening in Linux these days. Modular nature of development and releases showing its strength. Hoping this gets into distros soon.

Couple of thoughts. Anyone using KVM to run WinXP unmodified? How's the performance? Anyone running on PS3 as a day-to-day desktop?

Re:Amazing

[shaitand]

'Anyone running on PS3 as a day-to-day desktop?'

No but the feature was a freebie not a manpower waste. Sony had their own coders write the PS3 support (which if you read the changes you will find doesn't actually provide support for the PS3).

Re:Amazing

[MartinG]

Hoping this gets into distros soon.

The latest ubuntu pre-release has the 2.6.20rc kernel. This will be 2.6.20 final (+patches) in the final "Feisty Fawn" release in a couple of months.

Also, I believe (but I'm not 100% sure) that fedora 7 will ship 2.6.20. Current pre-release (test1) and rawhide have 2.6.19.

Re:Amazing

[Howard Beale]

Using KVM with 2.6.18 to run Windows XP Pro. System is an Acer 5100 laptop (Turion X2 TL-50, with 2 GB RAM and 5400 rpm HD). XP performance is acceptable for daily use. Run Win98se as well, but have to disable KVM and run with just qemu. Performance is OK there as well. Looking to install OS/2 Warp for kicks, but need to make floppy images.

Re:Amazing

[mackyrae]

rc6 is in there right now. I think rc7 exists (uh, or did) though

Re:Amazing

[gbobeck]

Hoping this gets into distros soon.

Gentoo already has 2.6.20 (emerge vanilla-sources), other source packages (i.e. gentoo-sources) should have 2.6.20 soon.

Re:Amazing

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, IBM did most of it, with only some device specific help from Sony and Toshiba. The Cell CPU is going into a hell of a lot more things than the PS3, which is what makes it interesting. Not for video games, but for learning techniques for the next generation of massively multi-cored systems programming.

Re:Amazing

[dch24]

Hi Makyrae,

Just trying to be helpful... ignore me if you don't need this.
2.6.20-rc7 is in the testing directory. I've been running it since it was released last Wednesday, no problems. YMMV.

I'm glad that 2.6.20 has been released. I had serious problems with 2.6.19 and 2.6.19.1 (but now 2.6.19.2 is quite good). I expect the initial 2.6.20 will be much better. I'm going to reboot soon and try it out. :-)

Best of luck!

Re:Amazing

[mackyrae]

I'm using Ubuntu 7.04 alpha, and that's the kernel that happens to be in it. I assume the final 2.6.20 will show up in the repos in the next day or two.

Re:Amazing

[linuxIsLife]

'Anyone running on PS3 as a day-to-day desktop?' PS3 is not for day-to-day desktop. You can use PS3 to create massive parallel systems. Using virtualization you can run different kinds of application on it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtualization

Re:Amazing

[makomk]

Yeah, Gentoo has 2.6.20. It now even has the required ALSA SVN snapshot to get sound with it. (Apparently, 2.6.20 has broken ALSA backwards-compatibility again... wonderful. There's also something on his blog about a change in one of the -rcs that broke HAL support for audio devices unless you use a now-depreciated kernel build option, IIRC...)

Re:So...

[Teppic_52]

Your are joking, right?

'Many other things'

[mr_luc]

In addition to relative atime, relocatable kernels, microoptimizations, lockless radix-tree readside, shared pagetables for hugetbl, the new version includes:

Cropotactical callipygization, hoptic chamferbytes, chrome-plated floydbarbers, brillig/mimsy optimizations and full slithy tove support.

Re:'Many other things'

[TeknoHog]

Cropotactical callipygization, hoptic chamferbytes, chrome-plated floydbarbers, brillig/mimsy optimizations and full slithy tove support.

I'd be more careful with these jokes if I were you, given that Mrs. Tove Torvalds happens to be a karate champion :)

OMG I see a huge performance increase in Apache!

[shaitand]

I just loaded the new kernel up in my guest virtual machine and according to my benchmarks I experienced a 100% performance increase. That is HUGE!

Re:So...

[PenGun]

Fishing actually. It's pretty well the inverse of the goat thing.

Cache of Changes (readable, not verbose log)

[shaitand]

People complained that this was slashdotted so here is the cache

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:DeB7M2cAS8gJ: kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_20+http://kernelnewbie s.org/Linux_2_6_20&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client =firefox-a

OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[derrickh]

When Apple released its lastest OS, they talked about all the pretty colors it has, and the cool music you can listen to.

When Microsoft released Vista, they talked about all the pretty colors it has, and the cool music you can listen to.

The latest release of Linux is trumpeting virtualization, hypervisors, microoptimizations, and something about a lockless radix-tree.

Nuff said.

D

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[the_humeister]

Technically speaking, "Linux" only referes to just the kernel. So there won't be any pretty colors or music to listen to with just a kernel (unless you're on LSD).

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[Nasarius]

Well, that's mostly because of the nature of the thing. Linux is just the kernel, whereas Windows and MacOS X include everything from the kernel up through the desktop and some applications. Rest assured that KDE 4, for example, will have pretty colors!

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

When Apple released its lastest OS, they talked about all the pretty colors it has, and the cool music you can listen to.

When Microsoft released Vista, they talked about all the pretty colors it has, and the cool music you can listen to.

The latest release of Linux is trumpeting virtualization, hypervisors, microoptimizations, and something about a lockless radix-tree.

Do you think that might be because "linux" the kernel does not even have a user interface with or without pretty colors nor a music player?

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[yoprst]

Hey, that's ok. I'll start worrying once KDE and GNOME guys start talking about virtualization, hypervisors e.t.c.

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, man, your radix tree is totally lockless!

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

there won't be any pretty colors or music to listen to with just a kernel (unless you're on LSD).

I am on LSD, you insensitive clod! And the colors are very pretty to listen to!

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[DarthChris]

What if you were to directly output the binary contents of the kernel to the display/sound? It might not fit everyone's definition of 'music', but I'm sure it would give some pretty colours...

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, just another reason to switch to FreeBSD then, which tastes great:
"35% of the volunteers said that FreeBSD tasted sort of orange, whereas Linux tasted like purple haze."
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/f aq/funnies.html#VERY-VERY-COOL

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[shaitand]

The last few people who posted 'linux is just a kernel' in response to this got modded up, so mod me up too! Oh and you will find pretty colors if you take LSD.

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[JackieBrown]

That's my new sig. Thanks!

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[dosius]

Yeah, I've done some dogfood tests with my FOX project and found that the user interface, while similar enough to GNU for your average Linux user, is different enough to feel slightly alien to your average Linux user. Of course this is because it's based on BSD, and it does feel a lot like BSD.

The whole point of FOX was initially to prove Linux didn't need GNU.

-uso.

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[grcumb]

The latest release of Linux is trumpeting virtualization, hypervisors, microoptimizations, and something about a lockless radix-tree.

Actually, that's a replacement for the Jell-o Tree, which had to be locked all the time to keep those darned kids out of it.

Come on, mod me Informative. I dare you.... 8^)

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[smash]

Kernel revision != O/S release.

Thanks for trying...

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't? No wonder Linux isn't ready for the desktop. They should start working on a kernel module or something.

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[Vexorian]

Rest assured that KDE 4, for example, will have pretty colors!

We can only hope...

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Well lets see what an operating system is shall we? An operating system is a program that acts as an intermediary between a user of a computer and the computer hardware. An operating system is the one program running at all times on the computer (usually called the kernel), with all else being user interfaces and application programs. So which part of 'pretty colors' and 'cool music' did you expect out of something that wasn't an application program? I know idiots like bill gates try to explain that the GUI is part of the o/s, but remember he flunked out of university, and is much better at screwing people in business than at programming 'hello world'.

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[Andy Dodd]

um, bootsplash? The Penguin in the upper left corner of the screen?

Clearly, the Linux developers need to take a cue from Windows and put graphics drivers in the kernel, permitting a 3d-accelerated Tux at bootup, along with 64-voice software synthesized music. We're falling behind!

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[gpmidi]

All the FreeBSD devs see lots of pretty colors... -Paul

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[PenGun]

I remember it well. 500 mics of Owsely's finest. A purple double dome actually. Just killer for the normal weekend tripper. So that's why slak does it for me ....

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[rbanffy]

I could listen to Apple II binary tapes and distinguish between code and bitmaps from the rhythmic patterns of the sound.

I bet my current memory dump would have some interesting musical properties, as there is so much more bitmap data in the machine.

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[shaitand]

This is the most informative post in the whole thread.

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Can you cite your definition of O/S please? Or did you just make that up????

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[nschubach]

Wait, did you just say that the new Linux Kernel will have a singing penguin at boot up? I'm totally there!

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[bcmm]

cat /boot/vmlinuz >> /dev/dsp

Starts off doing interesting stuff, then sounds like white noise (cat /dev/urandom >> /dev/dsp) later.

As mentioned further up, cat /dev/mem >> /dev/dsp can sound much more interesting, depending on what you run.

Re:OSX vs Vista vs Linux

[drinkypoo]

Clearly, the Linux developers need to take a cue from Windows and put graphics drivers in the kernel, permitting a 3d-accelerated Tux at bootup, along with 64-voice software synthesized music. We're falling behind!

You jest, but I've often wondered why bother with all this framebuffer bootsplash crap and whatnot when you could just initialize the network and then bring up X...

That's nice...

[GFree]

... but does it run Vista?

Re:That's nice...

[SeaFox]

NO!

and that is a FEATURE!

Re:That's nice...

[Anonymous Coward]

download qemu, compile and try it

Re:That's nice...

[mackyrae]

And Vista is a spyware BUG

Re:That's nice...

[pboyd2004]

Wrong with all the added virtualization it will run Vista (provided you have virtualization features in your CPU)

Re:That's nice...

[Score Whore]

No it won't. From the notes:

The Windows install currently bluescreens due to a problem with the virtual APIC, a fix is being worked on and will be added in future releases. A temporary workaround is to use an existing image or install through qemu - Windows 64-bit does not work either

Given that QEMU can't install windows 2000 and above, you're pretty much fucked with this at the moment.

Re:That's nice...

[JackieBrown]

What are you talking about? QEMU can be used to install both XP and 2000. (Runs slow though.)

Re:That's nice...

[Wingnut64]

... but does it run Vista? No, but it will run your nVidia hardware...

Re:That's nice...

[Blackknight]

Yes, as a virtual machine.

Either ...

[Anonymous Coward]

sue the school or get past your second year.

Random thoughts

[Anonymous Coward]

The announcement read a bit like it was intended for April 1. I know almost nothing about the kernel so I couldn't tell whether my leg was being pulled or not.

A quick word search found no mention of GPL or 'license'.

Many of the contributors had unpronouncable names. I take that to mean that there is heavy international involvement in kernel development. That sounds like a good thing to me.

Some of the other posters complained about PS3 support and wondered about priorities. Such features in the kernel sound like a good thing to me. One of the features of Linux is that people can save money by using machines that would be obsolete in the Windows world. In fact, I'm using such a machine to type this post. It's a thick client running Damnsmalllinux. It's not taking up space in landfill and it gets the job done. There are lots of schools, non-profits, third world countries where support for ... Oh darn ... PS3 not P3 ...

Kernel Newbie's Detailed 2.6.20 list.

[antdude]

From http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_20 (raw copy and paste -- didn't fix the formatting) since the site is getting hammered:

Short overview (for news sites, etc)

2.6.20 makes linux join to the virtualization trends. This release adds two virtualization implementations: A full-virtualization implementation that uses Intel/AMD hardware virtualization capabilities called KVM (http://kvm.sourceforge.net) and a paravirtualization implementation (http://lwn.net/Articles/194543) that can be used by different hypervisors (Rusty's lguest; Xen and Vmware in the future, etc),. But this release also adds initial Sony Playstation 3 support, a fault injection debugging feature (http://lwn.net/Articles/209257), UDP-lite support, better per-process IO accounting, relative atime, support for using swap files for suspend users, relocatable x86 kernel support for kdump users, small microoptimizations in x86 (sleazy FPU, regparm, support for the Processor Data Area, optimizations for the Core 2 platform), a generic HID layer, DEEPNAP power savings for PPC970, lockless radix-tree readside, shared pagetables for hugetbl, ARM support for the AT91 and iop13xx processors, full NAT for nf_conntrack and many other things.

Important things (AKA: ''the cool stuff'')

Sony Playstation 3 support

You may like the Wii or the 360 more, but only the PS3 is gaining official Linux support, written by Sony engineers. Notice that the support at this time is incomplete (apparently enabling it will not boot on a stock PS3) and it doesn't support the devices included like the graphics card, etc. (commit 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12)

Virtualization support through KVM

KVM (project page) adds a driver for Intel's and AMD's hardware virtualization extensions to the x86 architecture (KVM will not work in CPUs without virtualization capabilities). See the Virtualization wiki for more information about virtualization in Linux

The driver adds a character device (/dev/kvm) that exposes the virtualization capabilities to userspace. Using this driver, a process can run a virtual machine (a "guest") in a fully virtualized PC containing its own virtual hard disks, network adapters, and display. Each virtual machine is a process on the host; a virtual cpu is a thread in that process. kill(1), nice(1), top(1) work as expected. In effect, the driver adds a third execution mode to the existing two: we now have kernel mode, user mode, and guest mode. Guest mode has its own address space mapping guest physical memory (which is accessible to user mode by mmap()ing /dev/kvm). Guest mode has no access to any I/O devices; any such access is intercepted and directed to user mode for emulation.

32 and 64 bits guests are supported (but not x86-64 guests on x86-32 hosts!). For i386 guests and hosts, both pae and non-pae paging modes are supported. SMP hosts and UP guests are supported, SMP guests aren't (support will be added in the future). You also can start multiple virtual machines in a host. Performance currently is non-stellar, it will be improved by a lot with the future inclusion of KVM paravirtualization KVM support.

The Windows install currently bluescreens due to a problem with the virtual APIC, a fix is being worked on and will be added in future releases. A temporary workaround is to use an existing image or install through qemu - Windows 64-bit does not work either (commit)

Paravirtualization support for i386

Paravirtualization is the act of running a guest operating system, under control of a host system, where the guest has been ported to a virtual architecture which is almost like the hardware it is actually running on. This technique allows full guest systems to be run in a relatively efficient manner (continue reading this LWN article for more information). This allows to link different hypervisors (lguest/lhype/rustyvisor implements a hypervisor in 6.000 lines; Xen and Vmware will be probably ported to th

Re:Kernel Newbie's Detailed 2.6.20 list.

[JoshJ]

I was scrolling through that to get to the next message when the phrase "child reaper" caught my eye.

I have no idea why it jumped out at me like that.

Re:Kernel Newbie's Detailed 2.6.20 list.

[Anonymous Coward]

Guilty conscience?

Re:Kernel Newbie's Detailed 2.6.20 list.

[Anonymous Coward]

round_jiffies() infrastructure

Thank heavens for that. I don't know how we all managed with the old square_jiffies.

Re:Kernel Newbie's Detailed 2.6.20 list.

[Anonymous Coward]

So VMs are, for better or for worse, emulators -- but emulators supported at the kernel level. Does this mean a fork of DOSBox could exist as a VM backend for this kernel, rather than as a separate app? Would there be a noticeable difference in speed and stability in such a fork?

Re:Kernel Newbie's Detailed 2.6.20 list.

[Vexorian]

You may like the Wii or the 360 more

Oh come on! I was hoping these discussions would have ended by christmas

Re:Kernel Newbie's Detailed 2.6.20 list.

[nschubach]

Christmas of what year?

linux-wlan-ng injection

[sinclair44]

Does anyone know if this fixes packet injection on Prism wireless adapter cards using the linux-wlan-ng driver and the aircrack-ng patch? It's been broken since 2.6.12 (but worked before that)...

Re:linux-wlan-ng injection

[kestasjk]

Nope, it is completely broken and will break your kernel if you try. -- Your neighbor

kvm versus vmware

[digitalsushi]

VMWare released their server product recently, for free, and it's basically the same thing as VMWare workstation, except workstation is expensive and does slightly less. (So VMWare server is pretty sweet. Check it out if you havent heard of it. We use it to virtualize several windows XP guests on a linux host).

I've looked at a KVM whitepaper and it doesn't look like it's quite stable yet. The paper did however mention that it's usably fast on a current processor. (Given it requires the VT extensions, it's inevitable not to have a current processor!)

Can anyone comment on whether KVM is a reasonable alternative to the VMWare Server product?

Re:kvm versus vmware

[Wesley Felter]

Can anyone comment on whether KVM is a reasonable alternative to the VMWare Server product?

It will be once the userspace management tools (e.g. virt-manager) catch up.

Re:kvm versus vmware

[arkhan_jg]

Not yet. I've played with it, and it's basically an alternative to the qemu closed-source module, it's using a modified qemu userland. The advantage of using a VT/SVM capable processor with KVM means you can run an unmodified guest OS; i.e. no paravirtualised custom drivers needed.

Its biggest weakness is speed. VMware have had years of tweaking and finetuning, while kvm is very very new, and slow in certain areas. General desktop is fine, but network speed was painfully bad - for example - when I tried version 10. Plenty of work coming down the pipe, and it looks like it could be a powerful opensource virtualisation tool - in time. Right now, it is a bit fiddly to get running, and not quite ready for a production environment.

For now I'd stick to VMWare or virtualbox, but definitely have another look at KVM in say, 6 months time.

Re:kvm versus vmware

[Anonymous Coward]

VMware Workstation has multiple snapshots which you can't do in the Server product. It also has all the team support stuff.

Server has the remote console and can run in the background though.

As a developer the multiple snapshot feature trumps all.

Re:kvm versus vmware

[aspeer]

except workstation is expensive and does slightly less

VMWare workstation actually does more than VMWare server, which is why it is not free. You can look up the comparison table on the VMWare site, but Workstation is usually more attractive to developers because it has (amongst other things):

• Multiple Snapshots - You can only take and rollback to one snapshot with the Server Product, Workstation allows you to go back to many different points in time.
• Shared folders - Not available with Server. Very handy for accessing the host filesystem when the networking setup of the guest does not allow connectivity to the host (think test LAN or similar)

The above features are "cream" on top of the core of virtualisation. If you just want to run a virtualized host, and things like snapshots or shared folders don't matter to you, use VMWare Server.

My understanding is KVM provides the infrastructure for userland programs (such as VMWare, Xen) etc to access hardware virtualization services provided by late model Intel and AMD processors. Asking if KVM is a reasonable alternative to VMWare Server is not really a good way to frame the question - one day VMWare may use KVM for virtualisation. A better questions may be "which user-space virtualisation tool provides the best features for me as a user/developer/admin - Xen, VMWare, WidgetWorks" etc.

Re:kvm versus vmware

[Have Brain Will Rent]

IIRC Workstation also supports cut and paste between windows belonging to different virtualized hosts.

Re:kvm versus vmware

[Anonymous Coward]

VMWare released their server product recently, for free, and it's basically the same thing as VMWare workstation, except workstation is expensive and does slightly less. That shows you've never used workstation.

Re:kvm versus vmware

[petermgreen]

umm, i'm pretty sure that recent versions of workstation have quite a few features aimed at developers and demo guys that server does not have.

also i belive vmware server's graphics support is intended for emergency admin not real use (that is i belive it supports remote use but is somewhat sluggish)

i never managed to get vmware server installed on my custom kernel based debian box though (it asks you about building a custom kernel module during the install but there don't seem to be any docs on how to try again if you fail the first time).

Re:kvm versus vmware

[TheOrquithVagrant]

Definitely not a reasonable alternative for VMWare Server yet. Go with Xen if you're intending to do anything remotely serious with virtualization and want an OSS alternative to VMWare. KVM, in its current state, is barely adequate for hobbyist desktop tinkering. Trying to boot less tested OSs can bring your entire system down. On a 64 bit SVM host, trying to start an OS/2 vm will do this, for example. I think it was let into mainline too soon. It's fine that it's limited in what OSs it can run. It's not fine that something you try to run in a KVM session can wreck the whole system.

Re:kvm versus vmware

[diegocgteleline.es]

2.6.21 will have some nice speed improvements for KVM

Re:woop!

[marcello_dl]

You may stop assuming an OSS point release is like a closed source point release, made to gradually fix the bugs you knew were there since version .0

I want this questionn answered...

[bogaboga]

With the release of this Kernel...does this event help us on the desktop front? If so, how?

From what I see, we [on the Linux bandwagon], have a long way to go. We're still playing catch up on in many areas critical to common desktop computer users. I hope some one is listening.

For those who may be wondering how I play my part, I'm very active on the documentation and help systems on Linux distros...all that are still very very wanting compared to the competition.

Re:I want this questionn answered...

[Yetihehe]

The release of this kernel is not doing much for desktop linux. It's intended for WHOLE GNU/Linux, not only desktop distros.

Re:I want this questionn answered...

[Anonymous Coward]

I keep hearing Linux -- not just the distros but the very "core" of Linux isn't suitable to desktop use "quite yet". Could you please elaborate? If anything I think the applications, more than the OS itself, determine whether or not an OS is "ready" for desktop use. In that case, I still think it has a ways to go (at least as someone who makes music... I do most of my visual artwork in Linux via Blender and Gimp, but all the GOOD sound programs are on Windows or Mac... blah), but what exactly is wrong with the kernel itself when it comes to desktop use?

Re:I want this questionn answered...

[shaitand]

I didn't see much in the changelog that was useful outside of a server farm.

P.S. There is no such thing as GNU/Linux.

Re:I want this questionn answered...

[mackyrae]

Well, there's a list of new drivers with an "and more" tagged on. I'd think every driver for anything currently in use (as in, tape drives don't count) would be a good thing for desktop users. The less "my video/sound/pci card doesn't work" crap to deal with, the easier it is.

Re:I want this questionn answered...

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, I think virtualisation is quite good for Desktop Linux. A few people I know made the switch to Linux when they saw that they could run Windows with (K)QEMU. It served as a nice backup to them, that was more efficient that WINE.

I like the fact that with Beryl I can squish and squash my Windows window, just like it deserves.

Re:I want this questionn answered...

[Nutria]

With the release of this Kernel...does this event help us on the desktop front? If so, how?

From what I see, we [on the Linux bandwagon], have a long way to go. We're still playing catch up on in many areas critical to common desktop computer users. I hope some one is listening.

In which desktop areas are the kernel weak?

Re:I want this questionn answered...

[caseih]

The things you are asking for will not be found here. They are mostly in the realm of userspace. Better GUIs, better hardware detection and setup, plug-and-play stuff. All of which depends on kernel support (which is already there) but is actually implemented in the userspace code of the distros. So you're really looking in the wrong place for these things.

Re:I want this questionn answered...

[Yetihehe]

From wikipedia: "A Linux system which includes system utilities and libraries from the GNU Project is sometimes referred to as GNU/Linux." I thought it's 100% correct name. We could now start flamewar about calling it Gnu/Linux, but it would be pointless.

Re:I want this questionn answered...

[init100]

what exactly is wrong with the kernel itself when it comes to desktop use?

Duh! It hasn't got the graphics subsystem integrated into the kernel. :)

Re:I want this questionn answered...

[jlowe]

I'm not really sure what you are expecting. What new feature in the kernel could directly affect desktop linux (Outside of adding drivers, more efficient hardware resource usage, etc.)?

I think you are confusing the purpose of the kernel with the software that runs on top of it. Yes, there are improvements that could be made here, but I do not think that there is a huge gap between linux desktop experience and other operating system desktop experience. I've been using linux as my desktop exclusively for 8 years now, and it continues (in my eyes) to outperform and be less intrusive than an OS like XP or Vista.

Lockless radix trees

[Logi]

Cool, I'm going to pick me some radices before they lock those suckers up.

Re:Lockless radix trees

[heroofhyr]

Even if they get locked up they shouldn't be too hard to find. The radix doesn't fall far from the tree, after all.

5 digit ID

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh? What's wrong with STOP?

You've been on Slashdot so long that you still remember when the NO CARRIER joke referred to telegrams. Impressive!

Why is this modded troll ?

[Salsaman]

Mods on crack again ?

Re:Why is this modded troll ?

[misleb]

Because there is no "moron" option.

Colourful linux kernel...

[fprog26]

Technically speaking, "Linux" only referes to just the kernel. So there won't be any pretty colors or music to listen to with just a kernel (unless you're on LSD).

Well, I'm not running BSD, but technically speaking, when you boot the kernel,
you see all those amazing color, like green [OK] and sometime some red [failed]...
and yellow and sometime some penguin in the corner...
Sometime you can listen to the beeping music it does when it panics!

Sorry to hear that you have only a speaker less monochrome booting console!!!

Re:Colourful linux kernel...

[batkiwi]

That's the init bootup system loading things from your /etc/init.d directory (or whereever appropriate for your given distribution), nothing at all to do with the kernel :)

Re:Colourful linux kernel...

[philicorda]

The best way to get cool colors with linux is to use the new relocatable kernel, and load it into shared video memory.

Re:Colourful linux kernel...

[grcumb]

The best way to get cool colors with linux is to use the new relocatable kernel, and load it into shared video memory.

"I hear purple is faster."

Re:Colourful linux kernel...

[TheLinuxSRC]

...nothing at all to do with the kernel :)

Actually, isn't the "some penguin in the corner" framebuffer built in to the kernel? Just asking. :)

Re:Colourful linux kernel...

[holistah]

yes, and the linux kernel to boot...the gp mentioned BSD kernel showing a penguin... I haven't used any flavor of BSD in over a decade but I highly doubt that it would show a penguin :P

Re:Colourful linux kernel...

[Circlotron]

"I hear purple is faster."
So... 2.6.20 induces synaesthesia?
http://www.uksynaesthesia.com/

Ooops

[Salsaman]

That was meant as a reply. I screwed up.

Re:OMG I see a huge performance increase in Apache

[Tribbin]

So you now use the SMP option...

Re: eComStation

[user_ecs]

Could you please post to the mailling list how the OS/2 install goes.
http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Lists%2C_IRC

Can you also try eComStation.
http://www.curtissystemssoftware.com/preloads.htm
Thanks

PS3 support

[cxreg]

Unless things changed since the last RC, the "ps3 support" is incomplete and unusable at this point, and you still need to stick with the 2.6.16 kernel that YDL is shipping

Big FLASH

[EmagGeek]

Hey I have a question. Now that FLASH thumb drives are getting ginormous, are there any linux distros that can install to a thumb drive out of the box? Just curious, but if I could carry around my linux box on an 8GB thumb drive, I'd be stoked...

Re:Big FLASH

[smash]

There are docs for DSL linux that tell you how to do it - it takes a little buggering around.

However, I've run into issues when trying to boot on SATA systems, as it treats your USB drive as a SATA device, and the root device listed in your usb stick then refers to the SATA disk in the machine.

I'm pretty sure you could work around that by specifying boot parameters when booting (for the correct root device) but haven't looked into it much.

Re:Big FLASH

[yoprst]

Puppy Linux?

Re:Big FLASH

[flyingfsck]

Mandriva has a Flash version.

Re:Big FLASH

[Aladrin]

Not really, but theres tutorials on making k/x/ubuntus livecd run from a flash drive, with persistence. Like

http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=10627 99&postcount=100

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LiveUsbPendrivePersisten t

http://nsaunders.wordpress.com/2006/11/06/a-usb- stick-grub-and-ubuntu/

Ive been messing with it, but it keeps messing it because I keep trying odd things like using a second stick for persistance, and trying to make a second partition on the same stick, but in fat32 instead of ext2. (Not a good idea, apparently.) I also havent had much time to mess with it.

I would definitely like to see a Kubuntu install-to-usb-drive version.

Re:Big FLASH

[Aladrin]

Gah, it added spaces. Lemme try that again.

http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=1062799 &postcount=100
http://nsaunders.wordpress.com/2006/11/06/a-usb-st ick-grub-and-ubuntu/
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LiveUsbPendrivePersistent

Re:Big FLASH

[Vexorian]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slax

Re:Big FLASH

[wes33]

Mandriva Flash: http://www.mandriva.com/en/linux/2007/node_3481/

Re:Big FLASH

[Rob4127]

INSERT

Re:Big FLASH

[Anonymous Coward]

Are there any distros which *can't* install to a thumb drive?

I installed Debian two days ago. The installer loads USB drivers (because you may be installing *from* a thumbdrive), and you can install to any disk device. (I didn't try installing to a USB drive, but I installed to an external Firewire drive.)

I would be a little bit surprised if this wasn't true of just about every distro these days.

virtualization is a big deal on the desktop

[Anonymous Coward]

The new kernel adds some virtualization support. This will let people run windows at full speed (instead of slowly with an emulator) on top of linux. This is pretty useful for migrating to linux but keeping that critical windows-only application running.

But, ultimately, what kernel you're using doesn't make a lot of difference to the desktop experience.

Is better for us to stay Reiser in the jail?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it work the ext4 filesystem for many weeks?
Do they work the fsck and mkfs utils?
Can i RIP 8.5 GB DVD-DL into the ext4 filesystem without any crash?
Is linux-2.4.20 good or bad to be updated my machine?

x86 forever

[that this is not und]

From the top page summary, it looks like Linux continues to be primarily an x86 oriented project. Which is fine, so long as it's honestly acknowledged. A lot of my machines here are x86 boxes, but the Sparc, PPC, PA-RISC, MIPS and 68000 machines also need modern software to run on them (or not, if they're just to remain museum pieces)

Linux from the start was launched as a 80386 project, and I can remember when it only could access IDE hard drives. Things come back to their roots, so to speak. I guess the huge common install base is what people code for. And that is Intel/AMD variants.

Re:x86 forever

[vranash]

As someone who has dinked with ARM, SPARC32 and x86 on linux I can tell you that modern kernels don't work especially well on the first two without patches (and in fact SPARC32 I haven't had bootable on anything newer than 2.2.19 with debian a few years back. ARM, in my case a zaurus can run 2.4.19-embedix but newer kernels have issues (I still haven't been able to compile, much less run a home-built kernel for it, only the openzaurus ones, which have issues.)

Honestly if you can deal with the issues, my best luck has been with netbsd/freebsd for alternate OSes. I ran NetBSD 3.0 off a scsi cdrom drive on three different sparc32 boxes (ss/5 ss/20 and ss/IPX) and it worked on all three. The latest debian boot cd only worked on one of the SS5's and neither the IPX nor the ss/20.

I still run the majority of my x86 systems on linux, but given the apparent decline in quality and ballooning base system requirements I'm seriously considering the pain of migrating to other alternate OSes instead.

Re:x86 forever

[misleb]

I seem to recall Linux running pretty well on SPARC systems (particularly the models you mentioned). Are you saying that support has actually gotten WORSE?

And where is the declining quality on x86 systems? 2.6 kernel is great.

As far as balooning base system requirements... who runs just a base system? What difference does it make whether the base system is 200MB or 50MB? Why in the world would you consider migrating just because the base install is getting bigger?

I've recently started running FreeBSD systems for servers, and it isn't any different there. Maybe the BASE is a little smaller, but by the time you build all your utilities and apps, it is pretty much like any Linux distribution. I mean, it is all the same programs. GCC, X, apache, postfix, etc, etc etc. FreeBSD might as well be just another Linux distribution as far as I am concerned. Though Haven't played much with Open- or NetBSD. How different could they possibly be?

-matthew

Re:x86 forever

[init100]

As far as balooning base system requirements... who runs just a base system? What difference does it make whether the base system is 200MB or 50MB? Why in the world would you consider migrating just because the base install is getting bigger?

Now I'm not really sure what you mean with base system, but the ability to run small Linux systems is essential to the embedded market. I have a Linksys NSLU2 that in its default configuration runs Linux off an 8MB flash drive.

Re:x86 forever

[Chirs]

The summary is a bit misleading. The core kernel works just fine on a vast array of hardware. (Possibly even more than netBSD, the relative comparison changes over time.)

A lot of "specialty" features (oprofile, kexec, kprobes, etc.) tend to be limited in support initially, and only gradually gets extended to multiple architectures. The virtualization stuff is particularly interesting, as x86 has seen a lot of movement there recently while ppc64 has supported it from day-one.

For work I develop linux on ppc, ppc64, arm, mips64, and x86. My main development box is a dual ppc64 Mac G5.

Re:x86 forever

[misleb]

Embedded systems are a whole different subject. I'm talking about base systems from common distributions for desktops/servers.

-matthew

Re:x86 forever

[vranash]

Yes, I am saying it has in fact gotten worse. Vanilla 2.4 and 2.6 kernels won't even boot on a lot of those systems, and I believe 2.4 when it did worked only supported UP configurations (smp would hang it on boot.)

As far as linux distros go, I try and keep it below 128 megs of memory usage, and runnable on Sub 500 mhz systems with minimal lag, which is becoming excessively hard to pull off without simply running off the console.

Re:x86 forever

[misleb]

As far as linux distros go, I try and keep it below 128 megs of memory usage, and runnable on Sub 500 mhz systems with minimal lag, which is becoming excessively hard to pull off without simply running off the console.

Linux developers just can't win, can they? Don't put enough code/features in there, and they are considered to be lagging behind. Get enough features to be considered a modern operating system competing directly with Windows and OS X, and you piss off the people still trying to run Linux on systems from 1997.

Anyway, what alternatives are you considering? Because all the other unix alternatives that I am aware of run almost exactly the same software: X, window manager, xterm, Firefox, bash, etc. Does gcc somehow work differently on the alternatives, producing smaller binaries that are more memory efficient? Or are you talkign about going REALLY alternative like ReactOS or AmigaOS or something like that? I hear AmigaOS is pretty efficient. Of course, it doesn't have things you might take for granted in LInux such as proper memory management or multiuser capbilities, but hey, no bloat...

-matthew

Re:x86 forever

[that this is not und]

The base distribution of NetBSD is a 212 MB iso for i386. For Sparc it's a 156MB iso. That is a complete distribution, including networking, devtools, a full BSD userland, a complete and function X11 distribution, etc. You only have to pile on another 100MB of packages to have a highly usable system.

That base distribution will run nicely on an old 386 laptop. I've run the 68K Mac version of NetBSD on an SE/30, which is a machine with a 16 MHz 68030 processor and commonly 16MB of RAM. It ran X11 fine.

There's probably (still, hopefully anyhow) a way to get a decently complete Slackware distribution on small hardware. I haven't tried in awhile, since it would only interest me if I could install it on a BUNCH of my older small hardware, i.e. machines with older Sparc, 68K, and first-generation 80386 processors.

Fault Injection? Old news...

[CookieJago74]

Microsoft has been using this for ages.

Don't to ext4

[Anonymous Coward]

Every time you use ext3/ext4 Reiser kills a woman. Sure they're Russian women so they're not worth anything, but they still shouldn't be killed. They shuld be workin' the streets instead.

6*9==42

[gd2shoe]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hitchhiker's_Guid e_to_the_Galaxy

6*9==42

"What do you get if you multiply six by nine?" Arthur then comments, "I've always said there was something fundamentally wrong with the universe."

(ironically, 6*9 does == 42 in base 13...)

Re:6*9==42

[AlanS2002]

#include
#define SIX "1 + 5"
#define NINE "8 + 1"

int main()
{

      printf("SIX multiplied by NINE is %d\n", SIX * NINE);

      return 0;

}

Thus it is proven that 6 * 9 = 42

Re:6*9==42

[hotdiggitydawg]

You could probably provide a better reference than that...

Re:6*9==42

[sconeu]

Error: operator* not defined for const char*, const char *.

Remove the quotes from your #defines.

Re:6*9==42

[danpsmith]

In the end of The Restaurant at the End of the Universe by Douglas Adams, a possible question to get the answer "forty-two" is presented: "What do you get if you multiply six by nine?" Of course, the answer is deliberately wrong, creating a humorous effect - if the calculation is carried out in base 10. People who were trying to find a deeper meaning in the passage soon noticed that in base 13, 6 × 9 is actually 42 (as 4 × 13 + 2 = 54). When confronted with this, the author stated that it was a mere coincidence, and that "Nobody writes jokes in base 13 [...] I may be a pretty sad person, but I don't make jokes in base 13." See also The Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything.

Not really that ironic. It's actually ironic that a population smart enough to know about different base systems of numerics would waste time figuring this out and making the backward implication of intention. Who the hell uses base 13 anyway?

Re:6*9==42

[Anonymous Coward]

> Who the hell uses base 13 anyway?

I have seven fingers on my left hand and six on my right, you insensitive clod!

Uh oh...

[h4ter]

"You may like the Wii or the 360 more, but only the PS3 is gaining official Linux support, written by Sony engineers."

I've seen the work of Sony engineers, and I don't like it.

Re:Uh oh...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but this is no 'slip it under the users radar' kind of exploit, this is stuff that gets very open peer review, not just by the regular kernel writers, but also by millions of others on the internet (grab a copy and take a peek for yourself).

ObDilbert

[Xenographic]

Maybe, but I think that mauve has the most RAM :-]

Re:ObDilbert

[sconeu]

Damn. You beat me to it.

ARM

[phorm]

Most PDA's I've seen run ARM. I tried installing an Opie version on my handheld but unfortunately the image-at-hand didn't handle the cardreader or infrared very well. With 2-4GB CF cards being rather affordable I'd say that you could do a lot with Linux on an ARM-based PDA... so I'd love to see more driver support for the various hardware in current-gen PDA's.

Besides, ARM rocks. A 400Mhz ARM-based PDA can perform amazingly well compared to a similarly clocked X86-based processor

/. Groupthink?

[NaCh0]

Weird... The other responses to your comment all take it as a knock against linux. I read your post as great insight into the reason why I use linux and not Vista or a Mac. Substance beats out fruity color schemes every day in my book.

typo in summary

[Anonymous Coward]

"hugetbl" should be "hugetlb"
see here for more info

PS3 support not complete

[n2rjt]

As of RC3, the PS3 support doesn't include drivers for PS3-specific devices such as the Ethernet controller, and doesn't successfully boot.
Things may have changed but I'm stucking with my hand-patched 2.6.17 with zd1211 support for usb wifi.
I use the PS3 Linux quite a bit as a family-room computer. Sound is limited to 2-channel, but good quality. Video has no acceleration, but is still fast and looks good on our 720p TV. Unfortunately, the built-in WIFI doesn't work with Linux, and the Sony-provided kernel seems to lack any support for USB WIFI.

Oh Come ON!

[dch24]

No one is going to post this?

"Two major products have come out of Berkeley, LSD and Unix. I don't believe this to be a coincidence."
- Jimmy S. Anderson

Re:Oh Come ON!

[b100dian]

I know it's a quote, but now it would be much more funnier if it said "LDS and BSD"

Re:Oh Come ON!

[init100]

But you spelled LSD wrong, so it wasn't as much fun as it could have been. :(

Re:Oh Come ON!

[TeknoHog]

The GP probably meant Latter Day Saints, not Lysergic Software Distribution ;)

Knoppix 5.1.1 has an experimental script.

[fuego451]

From Knopper.net:

Experimental script for creating a bootable flash-pendrive from a running KNOPPIX live session (mkbootdev by Martin Öhler)

I haven't tried it myself but I've read comments from others who have and they say it works great.

Wow !!!

[linuxIsLife]

I just compile and install new kernel on my Debian box, it's cool. I see huge increase of performance in memory consuming application. Have someone feelings like me?

Re:Wow !!!

[Slashcrap]

I just compile and install new kernel on my Debian box, it's cool. I see huge increase of performance in memory consuming application. Have someone feelings like me?

You are one pathetic fucking troll. Five posts so far and not a single one has been modded down. You've only had one reply and that was some old freak that just wanted an excuse to drone on about the dot com days. I doubt he even read your post.

Your attempts to sound like a non-native English speaker could really use some work too. I think you must be trying harder, yes?

Honestly, I despair of the younger generation. Go away and study some of the great trolls and then come back when you actually have something to contribute.

Re:Wow !!!

[linuxIsLife]

ok smart man, this thread is about Linux kernel, not about discrimination.

Could not resist...

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

Dude!

Zombie process

[hey]

This is all good but do we still have Zombie process?! (Something Windows doesn't have.)

Re:Zombie process

[Bob of Dole]

Yes... Did you read the page you linked to?
Zombie Processes are not a bad thing. They're not memory leaks.
If you have a lot of zombie processes hanging around it's because of a bug in a program. It's pretty unlikely that it's a kernel bug.

Re:Zombie process

[Anonymous Coward]

Bug or not -- they should be killable with -9.

Re:Zombie process

[klossner]

You can't kill something that's already dead.

However, you can remove the zombies from your process table by killing their parent. The orphans will be adopted by the init process, which will reap their souls and allow them to shuffle off this mortal coil. And, by identifying the parent, you'll know which program is ignoring its dead children and needs attention.

Re:Zombie process

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, so they aleady dead.
Then kill -9 should remove them from the process table -- and do what I mean.

Asshole.

[Anonymous Coward]

This comment hurts my brain. You bitch about TLAs but they're not even acronyms. Do you even know what TLA stands for?!

...

If you're interested in any other feature or changes, the kernel newbies site is instrumental!

You got modded informative, and indeed you are appear to know what you are talking about, but you're still an asshole. Congratulations.

Re:Too bad...

[miro f]

I know there is all this hooplah about a new version of Windows, but it just makes me realize what a shame it is that it wasn't programmed right the first time around.

sorry... couldn't resist...

I wonder how many bugs this new stuff will have

[Viol8]

Thats a LOT of new low level stuff to go into a supposed patch release version. It will be interesting to see how many 2.6.20.x versions there are before it all settles down. Personally I think they've put too much in but time will tell. I just hope 2.6.20 doesn't turn out to be another turkey of a version because Linux's reputation for stability and reliability has already suffered with the 2.6 series as it is.

Something from one of the talks at LCA2007...

[babbling]

If you want people to RTFM, write a better FM.

nah

[r00t]

STOP is not the only signal for pausing a process. Linux also offers the signals TSTP, TTIN, and TTOU. That's 4 to choose from!

You can also attach a debugger, suspend-to-ram, suspend-to-disk, trap into a kernel debugger, or just edit /dev/mem.

I have PPC

[r00t]

It runs the very latest kernels just fine. Excepting some very rare pre-release versions, I've never had any trouble running the very latest developent code.

Not that my machine isn't a museum piece though. It's PPC!

Unpopular machines don't have many developers. Nearly nobody can test on the hardware. 32-bit SPARC has roughly 1 developer, PA-RISC might have a couple, MIPS and 68000 each have several...

Consider yourself lucky that the 68000 is supported at all. That chip has no MMU. NetBSD refuses to touch it, but Linux at least has a port. (in case you meant 680x0, the "m68k" port that uses an MMU, that's done by roughly 1 or 2 people)

With even Apple and Sun going x86-64, the future is clear. It's x86-64, not x86. Nobody wants to screw with x86 anymore.

Suddenly out of nowhere!

[Ayanami Rei]

A perfect spiral thrown from the laser rocket arm of Patton Manning hits an unsuspecting A.C. right in his un-jock-cup'd gonads.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

Hey genius.

[Ayanami Rei]

That's what the uncatchable STOP signal is for.

AC, meet System V unix. Unix, meet clueless AC.

No x86 on Linus' desk

[klossner]

Nonsense. Linus himself switched from x86 to PowerPC two years ago, and remarked last October that he still prefers PowerPC.

Not quite.

[Ayanami Rei]

You need a userland "personality" per VM that does the work that the VM'd thread is not allowed to do (simulate hardware).

Userland VMs like VMWare, DosEMU and QEMU would be modified to work with KVM to leverage a common infrastructure.

Currently VMWare and QEMU have special add-ons that need to be loaded into the kernel to speed things up; this KVM would create a common platform for that and source-level API. Which is nice...

For those a little more outside Hamburg ...

[foobsr]

... actually, there was a brewery named Bavaria in Hamburg.
( http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bavaria-St.Pauli-Brau erei )

CC.