Slashdot Mirror


Linux Kernel v2.6.23 Released

diegocgteleline.es writes "After 3 months, Linus has released Linux 2.6.23. This version includes the new and shiny CFS process scheduler, a simpler read-ahead mechanism, the lguest 'Linux-on-Linux' paravirtualization hypervisor, XEN guest support, KVM smp guest support, and variable process argument length. SLUB is now the default slab allocator, there's SELinux protection for exploiting null dereferences using mmap, XFS and ext4 improvements, PPP over L2TP support. Also the 'lumpy' reclaim algorithm, a userspace driver framework, the O_CLOEXEC file descriptor flag, splice improvements, a new fallocate() syscall, lock statistics, support for multiqueue network devices, various new drivers, and many other minor features and fixes. See the changelog for details."

10 of 346 comments (clear)

  1. Re:What about the license? by ZachPruckowski · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Guys, that's an honest question from the new user! Don't slam on the Troll mod the second someone says GPL3 and Linux in the same post!

    For the foreseeable future, Linux will be under the GPLv2 license. A lot of Linux code is only available under that license, and isn't forward compatible without developer permission. Given that many Linux devs either won't give permission or can't be located (died, stopped contributing, whatever), relicensing will be a major effort, even if leaders were so inclined. Basically, if Linux goes GPLv3, you'll hear about it at least 6 months in advance, and probably weekly during those 6 months if you read Slashdot.

  2. Re:What about O_CLOEXEC for sockets? by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You needn't worry about the kernel in this case, because the applications aren't paying any attention. Mozilla happily passes all open file descriptors (sockets, pipes, and files of any kind) to subprocesses like Adobe Reader. There's been a bug open on it for eons. Other applications have the same problems. It may be convenient to have O_CLOEXEC in open(2) calls, but it won't help of the application writers don't know what they are doing, or if they have "abstracted" their platform interaction to such a degree that they can no longer interact with any platform services (*cough* jvm *cough*).

  3. Re:Ummm. Neat. by Hooya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    personally, i think, that the height of computing was 'cron'. you needed a report every morning, put it in cron. you needed to analyze data every week, put it in cron.

    computing was supposed to automate. supposed to make everyones lives easier by helping the person. now look at it. walk into any corporate office and you'll see countless people (myself included) clicking on this and that to satisfy what the computer wants out of you. it feels like you are there to help the computer achieve uptimes, or defragged disks, getting rid of viruses, blocking ports, unblocking ports...

    am i there to help the computer do it's job? or is the computer there to help me do mine?

    why does the computer occupy the center of my desk? why isn't it tucked away in the utility closet?

    but that's a more philosophical discussion to be had - under the influence ;) i mean, heavily under the influence.

  4. Re:Ummm. Neat. by Atzanteol · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Slashdot is a technical community so my comment may not be well received.

    No, your comment won't be well received because it has nothing at all to do with the article or the Linux kernel.

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

    - Charles Darwin
  5. Re:Ummm. Neat. by nick.ian.k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just think in order to get Linux adopted by the populous, it's going to take more than kernel enhancements to see that through.

    But see, the problem is that nobody's arguing that kernel enhancements alone *are* going to result in the rise of desktop-Linux-for-the-masses. What you're doing is akin to walking into a university campus that's just expanded a bit and proclaiming how they're not doing enough to save the baby whales. Yes, some of the facilities and information dispersed therein may be getting used by people looking to save the baby whales, and some of the staff may even be interested in saving the baby whales themselves, but the university is not in fact there to save the baby whales, but instead serve as general resource that can be utilized in a number of different and often drastically divergent ways.

  6. Re:Ummm. Neat. by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "But graphic UI's are the future of computing and I think it's high time for a distribution to make it HARD to find the shell in an OS."

    You can have my shell when you pry it from my cold dead hands - same as my keyboard!

    Most distros come with multiple GUIs, and those GUIs are superior to anything Redmond can put out. Add that to the ability to run Windows in a window (where it belongs, if it belongs at all on your box), and mp3 and dvd installers a click away in the newest distros, 21 gigs of software free for the downloading, faster release/bugfix/update cycles ... if you want a GUI, you can have your pick.

    But do NOT take away my terminals. There are a lot of things that are quicker to do in a term than with a clicky interface. Have you not heard of "the right tool for the job"?

  7. Re:Ummm. Neat. by BrainInAJar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Linux is a kernel. A kernel's definition of usability involves well documented programming API's.

    Usability is a problem for the desktop maintainers ( the KDE or GNOME guys ), not the kernel hackers.

    Added bonus, the desktop maintainers can be OS agnostic if they like, so the usability gains that linux sees can easily transfer to BSD or OpenSolaris, should they turn out to be better kernels overall

  8. Re:You know the drill... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't use "meme" as a euphemism for "cliché".

  9. Re:Ummm. Neat. by Eskarel · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Well the answer to that question is that somewhere along the line computers changed from being just something which can do non value added tasks, to being tools which can be add value to a task being performed by a human being(whose value may vary).

    As with any other tool this means that it has to be somewhere you can get at it(on your desk) and that you need to know how to use it(ask anyone who has never used a hammer before to pound in a nail and see how many times they stuff it up).

    Now you might argue that a computer is a lot harder to use than a hammer, but that's mostly because it's metaphorically a bit more like a toolbox. It has tools within it to perform specific tasks as opposed to doing only one task(historically this has had to do with cost, but as we see comodotized hardware prices this may change). When you have a toolbox full of tools, you not only need to know how to use the individual tools, you also need to know how to find them in the toolbox, how to properly and safely remove them from and return them to the toolbox, as well as how to perform any required maintainence to your toolbox.

    In the same way in order to use your finance application(the tool), you need to know how to find it and run it as well as how to actually use it. Someone(not necessarily you) also needs to know how to put the tool where you can get it in the first place(install the software), clean the gunk out of the toolbox(maintain the PC) and to transfer all your tools from an old toolbox to a new toolbox when your old one falls apart, or you need one which can hold more tools.

  10. Re:Ummm. Neat. by the_greywolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've played with Linux a lot and would like to say, it never seems to be about the user experience. Usability should be a top concern for Linux to increase it penetration in the mainstream market.

    Would it surprise you to find out that most of the community agrees with that statement? .. With one caveat, however: You're confusing Linux, the opreating system kernel, with the rest of a complete system. If we were discussing one of the *BSDs, I'd not balk, but there is a huge difference between Linux and what you're talking about. Linux runs behind the scenes and has nothing whatsoever to do with usability or even UIs.

    I know there are distributions like Ubuntu which are making that a reality by leaps and bounds. But graphic UI's are the future of computing and I think it's high time for a distribution to make it HARD to find the shell in an OS. Let the Linux community do what Apple (NeXT) did for Unix (I'm preparing to be grilled for this comment), at the end of the day all most users care about is getting their work done.

    The last thing you want to do is hide functionality - especially necessary functionality - from users. All Apple did was wrap a Mach kernel under a NeXT-ish facade and hide the majority of the more "advanced" features. IMO, there's no reason to make the shell go away, but rather to set it aside in a non-intrusive and logical place - exactly how most current distributions set it up. You can still get to a terminal emulator in OS X - it's harder, sure, but it's still trivial to make it readily accessible - and it uses BASH, a powerful and quite useful shell. By contrast, on Windows, it's not obvious where the shell is right away, and once you know where it is, you quickly find it's limiting and hard to use - if you're an advanced user, it's useless.

    Please Linux developers, unify the OS and create something that at least 90% of the computing population can accomplish something on, not just the brainy and overwhelmingly patient.

    It's quite unified. There's surprisingly little fragmentation in the community (save for Vim/Emacs and KDE/Gnome zealots), and a lot is accomplished daily. We have, right now, not one but ten (more?) advanced, powerful, and very usable desktop environments (including Gnome and KDE); a constantly improving graphical server that now supports advanced 3D effects, render acceleration, compositing, and multiple pointers (new! for multi-touch displays and the like a la iPhone); powerful multimedia features that audiophiles and videophiles are turning to in droves; multiple complete suites of office-targetted applications (KOffice, AbiWord, OpenOffice.org, and others); and many, many other programs that most users will always find that meet their immediate needs. And that's just in the stable repositories.

    My question for you is this: What do you think is missing? We'll get somebody on it.

    --
    grey wolf
    LET FORTRAN DIE!