Slashdot Mirror
Linux Kernel 4.6.1 Released; Some Users Report Boot Issue
Marius Nestor, reporting for Softpedia (condensed): Linux kernel 4.6.1 is already here, only two weeks after the official launch of the Linux 4.6 kernel series. For those not in the loop, Linux 4.6 branch is the latest and most advanced kernel branch available right now for GNU/Linux operating systems, but it looks like its adoption is a little slow at the moment. "I'm announcing the release of the 4.6.1 kernel. All users of the 4.6 kernel series must upgrade," says Greg Kroah-Hartman. "The updated 4.6.y git tree can be browsed at the normal kernel.org git web browser."
Some users are apparently facing boot failure issue on the latest version. An anonymous tipster tells Slashdot: Several folks on the web have reported a regression in the latest Linux kernels, starting with 4.6.1 and including the 4.7 beta that prevents booting and drops to busybox, at least the one supplied by the Ubuntu PPA. The boot sequence ends with "address family not supported by protocol: error getting socket" and then, "error initializing udev control socket" (screenshot here).
Some users are apparently facing boot failure issue on the latest version. An anonymous tipster tells Slashdot: Several folks on the web have reported a regression in the latest Linux kernels, starting with 4.6.1 and including the 4.7 beta that prevents booting and drops to busybox, at least the one supplied by the Ubuntu PPA. The boot sequence ends with "address family not supported by protocol: error getting socket" and then, "error initializing udev control socket" (screenshot here).
This is just a empty way to say that this build may or not fix security problems.
In the past, several people complained that linux announces did not warn about fixed security problems,but failing to understand that many fixes are made even without notice that the bug was a security problem in the first place. So some people would only update the kernel when they saw any warning about a security fix and ignored the other ones... and then complained that the previous release notes were broken when it was found that some of the already fixed bug were really security holes and how easy it would be for the developers to add a note to the commit/release notes that everyone should/MUST upgrade the kernel.
As there is no "security team" in linux and the linux code rapid development, no one is really in charge of analyzing each patch security implication. Greg, tired of the complains decided to say that in every release there are bug fixed (except very simple bugs, documentation, etc), so if later it is found that any of those patches where fixing a security problem, they could just say that they were warned to upgrade. Also, some bug fixes are more important than others, so "should" is used for minor problems, but if there is any known bigger problem (security,corruption, stability), Greg usually uses the "must" word
Finally, only a few linux versions are "supported", so when one version is set to be EOL, people are warned to upgrade to one of the supported version, usually the latest
Higuita
Systemd in Ubuntu has been unstable as shit I know that.
Perhaps you could back that up with some kind of facts? I've been on systemd since the very first release (15.04), and I've had zero problems with it so far.
Just to make it clear, I'm not a systemd defender or apologist or anything. My opinion towards it is totally neutral (except journald, which I happen to like). I'm just really tired at the amount of uninformed and insane trolling ("systemd has NSA backdoors!" "there's no stderr!" "it has taken over the whole ecosystem and there's no alternatives!") in comments.