Linux 2.6.27 Out
diegocgteleline.es writes "Linux 2.6.27 has been released. It adds a new filesystem (UBIFS) for 'pure' flash-based storage, the page-cache is now lockless, much improved Direct I/O scalability and performance, delayed allocation support for ext4, multiqueue networking, data integrity support in the block layer, a function tracer, a mmio tracer, sysprof support, improved webcam support, support for the Intel wifi 5000 series and RTL8187B network cards, a new ath9k driver for the Atheros AR5008 and AR9001 chipsets, more new drivers, and many other improvements and fixes. Full list of changes can be found here."
Linux 2.6.27 is out, OpenBSD 4.4 is in!
Trolling is a art,
It's a shame this won't be in the upcoming Lenny release of Debian. The in-kernel support for heaps of webcams via gspca is a very nice user-visible element of this release.
http://release.debian.org/emails/release-update-200808
Although, I guess they made the decision for 2.6.26 before they realised that a September release would be an impossible target.
Ask me about repetitive DNA
In only 3 months, all of this code has been completed and reviewed by multiple developers. This happens *every* three months. The pace at which the Linux kernel is moving and yet still maintaining quality is incredible. It is clearly the case that the Linux kernel has hit a new kind of critical mass and is now a form of software development that has never been seen before. The sheer number of people involved changes what is possible. If you suggested that every single change to the codebase be reviewed by multiple developers in a traditional proprietary software development house you would be, rightly, laughed at. There simply isn't the resources.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Excellent! Macbook & Pro users can finally have wifi support.
W00t lots of goodies in this one. So... about time to change from the 2.6.infinity_and_beyond scheme to something else. What say you? I think the 2.6.x should have been left behind when the scheduler changed.
Before you get all excited about running UBIFS on your USB drive, take note: UBI is not for consumer flash media. These devices already incorporate hardware to hide their flash nature so they look like a plain old block device to your OS. UBI is for pure flash devices that directly expose the quirks and distinct characteristics of the underlying media.
So what kind of flash hardware is this for? Embedded devices, apparently. But maybe as flash storage becomes more common, more devices will support raw access?
what number is Vista?
666
Yeah, embedded devices definitely. It'll be awfully nice to see simple flash chips soldered onto a board rather than someone bolting an SD or compact flash socket onto them just so you can have a boot device.
Fragile, more expensive, and adds another physical item that can break. And not only that, but you can drop about 20-30 dollars worth of non-essential hardware from your design and still be on target. If you do any embedded work you know how big 20 dollars worth of hardware savings is. This new driver is *huge*.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Any chance that this will fix some of the ACPI problems with Linux? I recently had a terrible time trying to install Linux on a new Intel motherboard, mostly related to ACPI problems. I'm not blaming any of the Linux developers for this mess. I get the impression that ACPI is a disaster area and even Intel is unable to get it right on their own boards.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
If viruses were unique to Windows, we wouldn't have "root"kits. Instead, they'd be "Administrator"kits or perhaps "SYSTEM"kits.
Here's a thought. If they're using Gentoo on a 386SX, using the -git kernel tree, and having it auto-rebuild whenever there's a change, they'd never actually get far enough in recompiling to ever be able to boot up a new kernel.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Your office is in the Panoptican Library on Gallifrey? Wasn't that destroyed in the Time War?
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
You are clearly one of those arrogant assholes since you think there is such a thing as a pecking order in cyberspace.
As an arrogant asshole, you need to know you are one of the core reasons why Linux is only slowly gaining acceptance by the masses because you're too good to stoop to a "newbie's" level.
That being said...nah, you're still an arrogant asshole.
That's pretty old now, and was crappy at the time. You really should look at upgrading to OSX. The discussion at hand is about Linux kernels though.
I don't therefore I'm not.
That is will been destroyed in the time war. So nothing is stopped him from about to post that.
I don't therefore I'm not.
I know this is going to get modded as "off topic", but let's cover this...
SYSTEM and Local System are basically one and the same, and are almost perfectly synonymous with root. Network Service would be the equivalent of the "nobody" user - i.e. an account that you can use to run low-privilege services. Administrator would be the same as a user with administrative privileges in Linux (perhaps someone in the sudoers list). The trouble, of course, was that, until Vista/2008 came along, it was trivially easy for an Administrator to escalate to SYSTEM - you just had to run a scheduled job in interactive mode (think of a cron job with no password required) and you'd not only have root access, you'd also have access to the current user's console. For an administrator, this came in handy - of course, what was handy and convenient for an administrator was just as handy and convenient for someone else.
You should probably learn the difference between a root kit and a virus before you post to Slashdot in the future.
A fair number of people here actually have a clue, and thus do know the difference.
Might I recommend digg so that - in context - you sound like you have a clue?
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
It'd be the best April Fools day ever.
Have a relaxing week-end with your wife and children.
Last time I looked about 9 months ago there were well over 3000 build options for the 2.6 kernel. Thats probably gone up a lot. I used to build my own kernels , anything up to 2.4 was do-able. But 2.6 is so complex with so many options which frankly mean nothing to me , that you would end up with a right dogs dinner thats far worse than anything the distributions could produce and you'll probably find you missed out some important functionality and/or dependency for something to work correctly and have to start again.
Dr. Dan Streetmentioner would like to interview you for a book on tense formations which he wioll haven been writing.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Linux drivers are much easier to deal with.
Unless you're switching to GNU/Linux and don't want to have to buy all-new peripherals. To pick a random example from my collection of incompatible hardware, Microtek isn't helping the SANE project make drivers for its ScanMaker 4850 flatbed scanner.
I bet you buy your LEGO preassembled too.
I actually pay a LCSE(Lego Certified Systems Engineer) $150 per hour to assemble mine for me, its the only way to be sure.
Try out one of the wireless driver packages from http://linuxwireless.org/ (for hardy http://wireless.kernel.org/download/compat-wireless-2.6/compat-wireless-old.tar.bz2 ).
You will need to install your kernel source headers and the build environment
Then it's simply,
This will install the latest wireless drivers for your system and will not conflict with your distribution's package manager, should you want to remove the install and restore your previous drivers:
Make sure you are in the directory where the wireless driver installer is.
(It would probably be a good idea to reboot after that).
Normally I would never, ever recommend people compile stuff on Linux, however, in your case, it seems this would be the only way to get good support and this is really a last resort (a resort that you couldn't do under Windows if you ran into this problem).
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Surely a lot of that is up to the compiler. In fact everything you mention there is likely to be a compiler decision unless you code stuff in assembly (which means you are already being fairly processor specific).
Math Coproc: Replace it with a (much slower and longer) integer based floating point algorithm.
MMX/SSE: You just have to do lots of operations, rather than in one fell swoop.
The big one is having a MMU, which has been there on x86 architectures since the 386, and on pretty much any other processor outside of the embedded arena. For those systems you have uClinux, which has a 2.6 kernel release.
I've used some of the processors available on opencores (some of which are written from scratch and are quite different from existing processors) but many of those have had linux kernels ported to them.
Having the source available makes a huge amount of stuff possible. You could probably compile for a Turing machine if you were sadistic enough.
This is to save on these massive downloads required these days, also to allow for faster development of both kernels, and drivers.
One requirement of this, would be to build out driver stubs, so that there would be standardize the communication between the kernel and the drivers.
- Some of the benefits would be to have faster development schedules.
- Reduce the downloads.
- Provide a method for Hardware modules to communicate with the kernel. Allows for commercial modules to be used, and to provide a method for the kernels to be developed without kernel specific code.
- Removes the requirement for kernel specific modules. Some hardware doesn't have even upto date drivers because of changes with the kernel. (VMWare has this problem with the VMWare-Tools, considering the code hasn't changed that much there is at least 2 #ifdef's for the 2.6.* kernels).
- Allows for urgent updates of individual drivers. eg. e1000
- Distributions would upgrade more frequently, instead of back porting some fixes.
- Reduced bandwidth requirements, don't have to download a 50-60M tar.gz for the kernel, or 17+M for the kernel.
- Ultimately, it would eliminate a person from making a change in an area of the kernel, that affects many other modules, which results in changes in those modules or bugs in those modules.
All of this would allow for greater development speed, improved security, reduction of bugs.
When is the next stability-focused version (like 2.6.16) due out?
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
This bug could've been a showstopper. It essentially ruined your intel e1000e ethernet card, by overwriting the firmware. They've not patched it, according to LWN:
What does that mean? Obviously, it should not ruin your ethernet card anymore, but will e1000e work very well with this kernel? Or what?
Since this is a pretty high-profile bug it's strange it ain't mentioned in the summary. E1000e is a very popular gigabit ethernet chip from Intel, and actual hardware corruption is serious and (luckily) rare.
Assembling etherkillers for fun an profit
Because you did it in a bad way. Let's see how to explain this...
Every Linux user was a Linux newbie once. Being new to Linux does not make someone a bad person, nor does being confused by piles of jargon or the 20 different version numbers you have to face to understand the OS.
What you're doing is like going into a preschool and yelling, "Call that writing? You're such a n00b!" and then slapping the kids. It's not pleasant, necessary or acceptable, not even on the internet.
Besides, I'm not even sure the poster was even wrong, he may have just been using a weird terminology (Ubuntu 2.6.27 for the version of Ubuntu to use the 2.6.27 kernel).
In essence, you've not broken taboo, you've just been arrogant and uncivil. I suggest you break both habits forthwith.
All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.