Slashdot Mirror
linux 2.2.9 Released
rohirrim was the first
to let us know that the hit hot single 2.2.9 has made its
debut on the usual FTP sites. So if you're the type
that desires a newer stable kernel, get to it.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
wtf is happening with the linux kernel? 2.2.8 was only released the other day!looking at edge.linuxhq , this update looks more of just a prepatch.
how do i get my newer modules to load? it seems my older kernel doesnt wanna load the newer modules (i did a make modules ; make modules_install) is there any file (rh) that controls what modules to load?
Too much! I'm skipping this one ... and I doubt anybody's got anything new to say about it.
I think this just goes to show how effecient the open source model is for quickly finding and fixing bugs.
Now if only the Matrox G200 and SoundBlaster Live development for their drivers could be as fast...
and I'll say it again: minor Linux kernel upgrades are IRRELEVANT for Slashdot!
I think the other coward means freebsd (FreeBSD) not freebed.
Well, so much for their claim of "Poor support"...
Who says there's no such thing as a free bed?
Actually, unless you want your files corrupted, you should upgrade.
That's why this "_very_ minor" patch wasn't a pre-patch.
Yeah, this is the one: gonna make my disk run faster, gonna support my stupid sound card, gonna support Monster 2 Voodoo, gonna do better IP masqerading, 0.03% faster system calls, not fsck clean up every 8th boot up, tighter TCP stack. New config set'ems! Yeah, baby, this is the one!
I am still running a 2.0.36 kernel. Shh, don't tell anyone.
Uh, they name them 2.2.10, like the 2.0.x and 2.1.x series did.
And like upgrading a kernel is all that big of a deal? Grab the source patch, recompile, and reboot. Compile the option to use different module versions, and you don't even have to re-compile those. How easy is that?
It's pretty easy, as long as you're not trying to upgrade from a 2.0.x kernel. For my machines at home, and at the office, I have been TRYING to upgrade, but to no avail. Can't get them to compile at home (my fault, I'm sure). Got 2.2.7 compiled on Monday at the office, but all the ipfwadm stuff is gone and replaced with ipchains. Looks much better, but I haven't been able to read all the documentation to update my masquerading setup.
It may be easy, but it's not THAT easy.
jason
This is why God made (cheap machines|VMWare). Run the stable branch on your main machine, and play with the development ones with (the cheap machine|VMWare).
my -.03 cents
I know what you mean, do I want to upgrade to 2.0.38 or 2.2.9, or I can just stay at 2.0.36 where everything works just fine for me.
Well, I just get the patches which are always really small,
and save alot of download time. Then I just recompile my
kernel and set it up for the next power outage which is my
main cause of down time...
Hehe. I compiled and booted with 2.2.0-2.2.4 and skipped 2.2.5-2.2.7. Today i need to reboot this machine because they'll power off all my city for 2 hours. Yesterday i compiled 2.2.8 and now these guys release 2.2.9... Ok, i compiled 2.2.9 now but 2.2.x seems to be a very devel serie. 10 releases in 3 1/2 months...
Hell, for grins I should go load it up. I seem to remember a minimum install being about 25 MB.
Is it really newsworthy that a new Linux kernel has been released? The last few years it has been a biweekly event, and hardly something you'd call "news". If it's not a once-in-a-lifetime event, it doesn't belong on slashdot.
Besides, all
My 0.02 euros.
It seems a lot of people get really annoyed when new linux kernels come out so fast. They complain "blah blah i just download 2.whatever and now I have to get 2.whatever". No one says you HAVE to get the latest kernel. I think it's good to know that development is coming along nicely and everyone can see what is being done with it.
The Matrox G200 is on the Redhat 6.0 compatibility list. Is there something regarding the support for this card?
Then if the the kernel you are currently using works. Don't download and recompile and reboot a new kernel. Don't complain about the free stuff that people are working really hard at to make into high quality useful tools.
You are getting upset at folks who are busting their butts trying to make something good. For free. And you are complaining you ass off as if you were paying them.
Wake up.
They went all the way to 2.2.8-prepatch 8 before releasing 2.2.8, which is way more then any other 2.2.x has seen. Most of them only make it to prepatch 2-4. Anyways so it makes it to prepatch 8 and then release it, and then 2 days later they release another one. Why didn't they just go another couple of prepatches. Maybe they are starting to rush things or something. Anyways its alot better then waiting 3-4 months for a "service pack" so hats of to you linus and alan and the rest of the kernel crew.
Yeah, I had trouble with 2.2.8. It wouldn't compile ide.c..!
Bug - free didya say? My hearing aids must
be particularly badly tuned today..
Anonoymous Cowardy Custard
It must be all that virtual vaporware thats running. :)
To everyone complaining about the frequency of new
versions:
Take a look at the kernel version history -- we've
had a mere 10 releases of 2.2 in about 4 months,
by that time 2.0 had gone past 20! (and 2.1.0 appeared after 2.0.21).
"Poor support".. Maby it should have read: "Support for the Poor".
2.2.x is better than 2.0.x was, but obviously not as good as 1.x.
Mark
It's probably wiser to update to a 2.2 kernel seeing how every new distro that will be coming out now will have the 2.2.x series. Why would you want 2.0.37 when you can have something better like 2.2.x anyways?
Yes.
Linus, in case you haven't figured it out yet, is not the GPL-only bigot you think he is.
The G200 is the fastest card for Linux and X. Peroid. It wins hands down.. Now only if the 3d support had decent performance.
While this may seem a little silly,
it would be great if there was a, say 6-monthly
shootout between Linux, NT and some commercial
Unices -- so that they can be properly compared.
We could end up having the situation where
the NT people try to write lots of addons to
get NT's performance up, and the Linux people do
the same -- it could be fun, and beneficial for
both M$ and the Linux community in the long run.
(Since the over hyping that surrounds all these
inter OS benchmarks only makes things worse,
since people think that they matter a lot -- a
regular showdown would reduce that effect)
For $20 that is. http://www.4front-tech.com/
This kernel runs
like a gentle wind.
Look - the dawn has come.
And soon, if time allow. That is my understanding. Then it will be dropped from further development.
...
Out of caution, I am not doing anything to my 2.0.34 boxes right now.
However, as I have nothing but VIA motherboards, DPT controllers, and AMD chips, when everything settles down, I will be doing some work
But in the meantime I like the fact that it all keeps working just fine.
No, it really is faster. The disk buffering bug
in 2.3.0 was slowing interactive response to a
crawl. Read the kernel mailing list archives,
they are linked at linuxhq.
then I'll never have to load in a new kernel. Just keep the newest one sitting there hoping, wishing, conspiring to crash the system.
restart when they tell you there's some major problem instead.
...see the article on Segfault if you don't believe me.
I forgot (got the info at home) but its is..
/sbin/mkinitrd 2.2.9
/sbin/lilo..
make modules ; make modules_install ;
copy the kernel image
Then you need to
Then goto lilo.conf edit the "modimage" name in there along with your newer kernel entry..
then
your done..
Sounds blaster live already has a driver on linux.
[root@localhost /root]# /sbin/mkinitrd 2.2.8
/boot/initrd 2.0.3)
/boot
usage: mkinitrd [--version] [-v] [-f] [--ifneeded] [--preload ]
[--omit-scsi-modules] [--with ] [--image-version]
(ex: mkinitrd
I dont have a initrd file in my
depmod -a doesnt load the modules
insmod has to be done, EVERY BOOT
I've done a make modules ; make modules_install dont get me wrong, everytime i boot the new kernel wont load the modules. I'm using Redhat 6.
You dont have to rebuild for every patch....
DO NOT RUN 2.3.[0,1] unless you are a kernel developer. Linus opened the 2.3 tree to replace the waitqueue code. That means small changes in many many files. 2.3.[0,1] will most likely oops on boot if you even get it to compile.
:)
Again, 2.3.[0,1] is only for kernel hackers.
you have been warned.
Yeah, there's a driver (I use it), but its closed source, only loads into a 2.2.5 kernel (so I'm ignoring all this new kernel jazz..) and came out a few weeks ago with no updates since. I want my opensrc sblive driver!!!
Over the past two days, I've counted no less than four kernel version increment annoucements here on Slashdot. Do not get me wrong - I enjoy trying out the latest goodies like every other hacker... but to post a new article each time a little change happens is quite rediculous.
The issue here is not lack of interest in the kernel releases, it's more the redundancy of these articles. I currently, as I have for a while, rely on www.linuxhq.com and the mailing lists to watch for new kernel releases.
I personally dislike this "new" modicum of Slashdot to become an "everything Linux" site.
take it easy man.. no need to be bitter
Anyone else having difficulty compiling 2.2.8 and 2.2.9 on a bleeding edge Debian 2.1 with lots of potato? I get tons and tons of errors about previous declarations with the tcp.h, in.h, types.h, posix_types.h, etc. All those files are from the latest libc6-dev package. Weird thing is that 2.2.7 compiles without even so much as a warning.
That happens for me too!!
Look, there's a reason you all are not writers getting interviewed on Charlie Rose and dating adoring undergrad English majors. It's pretty obvious: you're writing sucks.
You obviously don't hack GTK+, then. :) The three version number components are known as GTK_VERSION_MAJOR, GTK_VERSION_MINOR, and (wait for it) GTK_VERSION_MICRO.
recompile to kernel to turn on kmodd support (the kernel thread that loads modules automatically)...
all will be well thereafter...
(seems that redhat has this enabled in their default kernels)
cheers!
A kernel a day
keeps sanity away
by time you have untarred one
another has come
has anything changed?
is linus deranged?
i state with much glee
i use freebed!
According to what Alax Cox said, they don't really care about this Microsoft-driven test. Mindcraft is just trying to find some kind of credibility after all that they have done (if you remember their tests on Novell vs. NT, you may understand how they're dumb and market-driven). i don't think neither Linux or Alan or any other serious Linux advocate could care about a company which have no grade of independency.
Marco Ermini
linux@markoer.org
This is typical - the last stable 2.0.x was 2.0.37 wasn't it... come on people. Obviously you haven't been using Linux for long enough to criticize the kernel revision process.
This is what makes Linux BETTER than 'doze... things get updated quickly. A few days is much better than Microsoft's response to NT service patch 4.
There once was a man from nantucket
who thought "one more compile won't muck it"
He said with sadistic gaul,
as he typed "make install"
"If this breaks an inode, just fsck it".
There were some changer to buffer write back .
( fs/buffer.c ) in the 2.2.8 , which were
reverted back in 2.2.9
I believe there was a good reason for that.
I suggest staying with 2.2.7 or upgrading to 2.2.9.
Just to be on the safe side
stein
Yes, Don't run 2.2.8 or 2.3.0!! Or at least,
don't do any heavy disk IO while running them.
Hopefully 2.2.9 is a fix for the bug in the
disk buffering code.
Lots of people download the kernel. It's much more efficient to just have tarballs for people to download. :)
Too free, or too much of a free thing? I too don't really understand these people. I guess they are just conditioned from Windows type OSes where there are NEVER fixes to anything (games sometimes put out patches quickly, but stop after say 2 months of the game being released :)). Do people really equate never releasing a fix as, "This software is completely stable and perfect?"
It's one thing to want Linux perfect, but holding back fixes isn't in our nature...
I was just wondering, I remember seeing 2.0.37 prepatches for a while, but a final 37 never came out. Have they officially retired the 2.0 line, or are people still working on making it stabler?
Linux kernels are:
2 = Major version
2 = Minor version
8 = Patch level
and optionally
-x = Pre-patch level
Some programs are:
Major.Minor.Build
But I've never seen a program refer to the third number as the "micro" version.
--
The world is neither black nor white nor good nor evil, only many shades of CowboyNeal.
Whichever way you decide to go, there's no need to wait... (see my previous post above). :)
Er... excuse me? 2.0.36 hasn't been out for any 436 days...
Earlier this week, I had to reboot one of my machines (because of a failing hard disk). It had been up for 273 days, running 2.0.35, because that was the latest stable kernel when I brought it up...
The only problem I ran into was in smbfs. For anyone out there who hasn't got even the modicum of C it takes to figure it out, the solution is to add a semicolon at the end of line 91, in linux/fs/smbfs/inode.c ("insert_inode_hash(result);") (I was going to include a patch, but Slashdot mangles it).
Yup. I grabbed both of them, for different machines. There were already three pre-patches out towards 2.3.1, anyway... the 2.3.1 final patch presumably would contain all of that stuff, plus the vital bit that rushed 2.2.9 out.
I suppose I could diff the two patches and see how much overlap there really is, but I'm too lazy to figure out the switches that would give me some useful information...
But my kernel's done cooking... reboot time...
According to "finger @linux.kernel.org", 2.3.1 is out as well. I suspect that whatever problem (I heard something about filesystem corruption?) that caused the quick release of 2.2.9 encouraged a similar release on the 2.3 tree... 2.2.8 and 2.3.0 are identical, after all...
And anyone who's got a problem with letting people know that there's a new dev kernel out can flame away. I've got a thick skin.
Posted by Myrdraal:
Kind of unlikely. The only change was one variable for char to signed char... Actually, I probably shouldn't have even noted that change because I believe chars default to being signed.
-Myrdraal
I have a motherboard with the ALi Aladdin V chipset that includes the M1543 IDE controller, which has always worked fine for me (I was running 2.1.something when I bought it). So what does this mean? Is there functionality that I wasn't getting out of my M1543 before that I will now if I upgrade to 2.3.1? Anyone know?
I hope not. The last thing we need is Microsoft driving the development of Linux. Since there are no shareholders involved, Linus has the option of just ignoring them, and working on things that are the most important, instead of putting out fires in the press.
TedC
New features come out all the time for older hardware that make it run faster. MTRR is one, and sound fixes have been most useful.
I've been in the upgrade cycle for a while waiting for better functionality (it works but not like I think it should) of NFS.
Improving memory management is another thing constantly speeding up the kernels. And for the late 2.0.x kernels improving PCI support helped out alot too.
So the moral should be don't upgrade unless you know what your getting? Or maybe upgrade unless you have better things to do.
for me I always keep kernel source patched to the most up to date possible. But I don't compile/reboot unless I have to or find a good reason too. IT also saves time in downloading an entire source tree five or ten revisions down the line.
^~~^~^^~~^~^~^~^^~^^~^~^~~^^^~^^~~^~~~^~~^~
If you have a multi processor machine then:
:)
:)))
1) You're a lucky bugger
2) I seem to remember a post about Linus sorting something out that affected multiprocessor machines in the 2.3.1 pre patches and i assume this is included in the 2.3.1
If you have a uni processor machine then just sit back and enjoy the apparent speed gains whether they are real or not.
>nothing wrong with a bit of 'healthy' competition
Whoever said anything with MircoSoft involment was 'healthy'? Certainly not anyone who's familar with MicroSoft's history and it's behavor in the DOJ trial in presenting rigged tests there also....
I have no clue abt coding, but would the recent release of the quake3 test have anything to do with this? yummy...
-----
If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed...
Now, I am getting SICK, REALLY SICK, REALLY REALLY SICK, VERY REALLY REALLY SICK, EXTREMELY SICK, ***** HYPER EXTREMELY SICK *****, of people like you that only whine and whine about something that do not affect them.
_ _____
Now I am only going to say it once:
**** IF YOU DON'T WANT IT, DO NOT GET IT, YOU MORON *****
_______________________________________________
Stop reading them, stop posting on them. Skip and move on. Create an account and explicitely remove "Linux" from your topic list.
If you can't seem to handle that, at the very least STOP WHINING.
According to Mydraal on his comment at Cutting Edge Linux, 2.3.1 has compile problems. No te jodas la vida, and go the stable way.
In Soviet Russia, Jesus asks: "What Would You Do?"
I'm completely confused by the negative comments here. What is the problem? If you're not interested in a particular revision of the kernel, avoid downloading it.
Unless you're completely anal retentive, it shouldn't matter if you miss a kernel revision. Just wait until you see something worth upgrading to, and be happy that those who had problems (Oracle, hd buffer stuff) had it fixed before they even had time to complain.
----------------- "I have a bone to pick, and a few to break." - Refused -------------------
GPL is one thing, but I still think RMS is going to throw a fit when he hears about this one.
Nonetheless, I like it. I hope there'll be some nicer-looking clients out soon, but the code's open enough that doing that is a possibility.
That should be your philosophy with EVERY kernel. Why upgrade if you're not having difficulty? I'm still running 2.0.35 on a couple of my boxen, with no problems whatsoever. And I'm sure there are thousands of users out there with earlier kernels still chugging happily. The only reason to upgrade with each kernel, besides having problems with old ones, is if you're a developer (in which case you should be keeping up with the pre-patches..)
Just because there's a new kernel is no reason to upgrade.
Log
we're running some machines with 2.0.36 too :)
hany
More Kernls to Compile Downloads take awhile Did I spell that right? A kernel haiku(sp?)
Many thanks to all the kernel hackers out there!
Keep up the great work and don't let all this bickering
about version numbers and too frequent releases get you down!
do what I do (for same rev kernels, like 2.2.x -> 2.2.(x+y)): .old, resymlink so that _at next boot_ the new kernel comes up, while leaving a lilo entry for the .old kernel
* run a stable kernel
* build a new kernel, mv orig kernel to
* keep rebuilding the new kernel, while not rebooting unless the system crashes.
Just don't forget to lilo and you should be fine. Now stop whining and enjoy the fruits of much labor!
I think it's because they -have- been conditioned by Microsoft and a lot of other software entities. When commercial software gets released to a new version, there is usually a marked difference (notice I didn't say improvement) in the new product.
So when a 'new version' of anything Linux is released, the first reaction by people like Splatty is that of a sheep: "Baaa, must get new software, it's a new numbaaaa, it must be better. Wait. This is a minor patch! Whaaa!! You guys suck! Stop making me download this stuff!"
And they never consider the possibility of reading the changelogs FIRST, or learning that the third number in a Linux kernel version indicates a MINOR patch.
How some of these people ever managed to learn how to use Linux is a mystery to me.
Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
Hey Rob & Hemos,
:-)
How about posting the Linux Kernel news under a different heading than "Linux" (perhaps "Linux Kernel")? That way anyone who feels that kernel updates are not newsworthy can filter them out and not bother complaining about it to those of us who find it interesting.
My own opinion: I happen to enjoy seeing the new Kernels posted here. It often prompts some good discussion, even though there are quite a few "who cares about new kernels" threads. Also, frequent kernel updates are one of the beauties of Linux. Quick features and bugfixes...gotta love it! Besides, nobody says you MUST download newer versions anyway. If it works for you, stick with it unless you really want to try it out.
Cheers,
Vic
It seems to me like there are often interesting discussions regarding the changes in the newly released kernels, here on slashdot.
In that sense, I think Slashdot as a forum works well. As long as there are people who post with interesting content, there is obviously some interest in the event.
Does anyone know what changed in kernel 2.3.1 from the 2.3.0 version. I just compiled the kernel and the machine feels significantly faster. It does not use any Swap on light load.
Help fight continental drift.
Not unless the 2.3 series has some mind-blowingly fundamental changes to the kernel. Fixes, enhancements, and minor features would in all likelihood lead to a 2.4.0 -- and since Linus has said that he doesn't intend for the 2.3 series to run nearly as long chronologically as did 2.1, odds are there won't be time for anything that spectacular to make its way in.
Learn to spell: nickel, missile, lose, solely, amendment, speech, kernel, probably, ridiculous, deity, hierarchy, versus
Use /sbin/ipfwadm-wrapper and you don't have to change a thing. No, you won't get the fancy IP chains, but everything will work at least and you can have a life instead of reading more documentation...
-Mike
You would have to make Linux maybe 5x faster to make Mindcraft benchmarks work - essentially a Complete Waste Of Time.
And it's dollars to doughnuts that the other benchmarks quoted by MS on their page were against SaMBa set up for security (default) and then benchmarked for speed.
One benchmark graph in particular showed what looked like a benchmark of CGI versus server-module; in other words, it wasn't benchmarking like against like. Surprise.
Do these benchmarks also verify that the received data is actually correct? The thought I have is that if not, "we" could do the same thing that MS appear to be doing, i.e. set everything up to be as fast as possible and to hell with the risk of corruption, and show them what a _real_ server OS can do. Full speed ahead, and damn the checksums! (-:
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Contrary to popular belief, upgrading to each minor kernel revision is not required by law!
The Kernel Gestapo is not going to bust down your door and demand to see your papers and ask why have you not upgraded to zee newest release?
it seems like you spend more time keeping up with new releases to be able to ENJOY it!
~centurion
Just goes to show that when there is a fix for something, or something new to add, it's out there as soon as possible. Not like Microsoft, who waits until they feel good and ready to release something, if at all. Remember the y2k fix for Win95 they held? That won't happen with linux.
And like upgrading a kernel is all that big of a deal? Grab the source patch, recompile, and reboot. Compile the option to use different module versions, and you don't even have to re-compile those. How easy is that?
The patch is teeny. As someone else already
posted, it should have been a pre-patch.
Most of it's m68k and arm updates... there's a
few other tiny patchlets for tcp.h, fs/buffer.c,
aha152x.c, ide.c, ide-dma.c, and ip_masq_quake.c
inside. That's about it.
Unless you're having trouble with 2.2.8, triggered
by anything listed above, don't bother downloading
it. Wait for the next one.
- Preferences: Solaris 10 (servers), Ubuntu (desktops), Solaris 11 (personal servers) -
Don't you remember 2.0.36 and 2.1.132, etc? It wasn't that long ago....in fact, neither was 1.2.13 (the one that i started with ;)
"The value of a man resides in what he gives,
and not in what he is capable of receiving."
--Albert Einstein
gee wizz.. I am behind.. I am still using 2.0.36.. where is my RH6.0 cdrom and I hope it doesn't have to many bugs... I'll have lots of patches to apply, and kernels to build.. good thing is that it is only 6 minutes a build on my machine...
Only 'flamers' flame!
Splatty, I think I know a solution to your problem. Don't get it unless someone sticks a gun to your head and forces you to. (That would be one really desperate for attention kernel hacker.)
I'm working off 2.2.5 on one system and 2.2.7 on another. And if I'm going to upgrade either of those, I'm going to learn how to use patches instead.
Alternate solution to your problem. Give each release a week or two. You won't be "l33t bl33d1ng 3dg3" (man, I hate that style of writing), but you'll be more likely to have a truly stable kernel.
Digital Wokan, Tribal mage of the electronics age
You meant to say "some people had problems with Oracle on Linux after upgrading to 2.2.8", and not "2.2.9" as you originally said, right?
----------
In a real emergency, we would have all fled in terror, and you would not have been notified.
so many changes
patch and patch and patch and patch
(better than windows)
"Cause there's 40 different shades of black, so many fortresses and ways to attack, so why you complainin'?"
Agreed.
I think the Mindcraft (and other tests showing relativly poor linux performance) is really great for pushing development ahead.
Among the FUD on the MS page in response to the Mindcraft (and other) benchmarks there are some valid points that I hope can be addressed with the newer kernels like filesystem and memory shortcommings.
------ Live free or Die!
In the changes file for 2.2.7 there was something about this:
"DHCP clients for 2.0 do not work with the new networking code in the 2.2 kernel. You will need to upgrade your dhcpcd / dhcpclient."
It's usually a good idea to look through all that stuff in the Documentation directory that comes with the kernel.
Mike
--
Mike
--
"Wi nøt trei a høliday in Sweden this yër?"
(licks the finger and touches the kernel with it) Hshhhh! Piping hot! Not surprising, considering the speed it arrived at... At this rate, the kernels will soon start burning through the bottom of my hardrive!
Seriously , though: Could it be that the kernel folks are trying to fix some issues in time for the 3rd Mindcraft test?.. Is that why the upgrades are coming at such speed?
--
--
Victor Danilchenko
Because Linus doesn't like it (that's the official response).
If you check out http://www.bitmover.com/bitkeeper/ you will find the program that _will_ be used (was meant to be for 2.3 but I guess they started that a little early)
Matt
Uh, what does the GPL have to do with anything?
;-)
XFree86, among a ton of other common programs, are not GPL either. Quick! You better delete them before anybody finds out you're using non-GPL'd programs!
Hang on a minute, your computer hardware was not released under the GPL either! Better put it back in the box, take it back to where you bought it, and tell the salesperson that you're too stupid to own a computer.
Matt
they should start limiting the releases of new kernels to once a month so I can keep atleast a 30 day uptime average :)
It's just Crap.
Well, the Mindcraft tests did expose some problems with Linux (or at least raised the priority of some known issues).
For example, Linux did have suboptimal scheduling behavior when many processes are waiting on a single event. This happens when a web server such as Apache forks itself many times to provide ready servers for incoming connections.
The scheduler would awaken all the processes even though only one would actually get the event. The rest would just go back to sleep. So the solution was to just wake one up. Hopefully this speeds up the Linux/Apache web server.
I'm starting to feel the rush..
we'll have 3.0 by the end of the month at this rate.. on a side note, ever since 2.2.8 came out, my dhcp died and cable modem died..bleh prolly something i did though
laters
------ Poo-tee-weet?
Bitkeeper is not GPL'ed, so are they really going to use it?
Alright maby its just me but form what I can see right now 2.3.X is in development (accually thats what is is infact.. development.. for 2.4) anyhow now that we have raced at an insane pace from 2.2.0 all the way to 2.2.9 what are we going to name the next stable kernel that is based upon the 2.2 kernel and not the development going on in 2.3?? I mean with the way things are progressing I'm sure we're gonna have to have some new changes to 2.2.9 before 2.3 is ready to be called 2.4??
so what will it be now 2.2.9.1 or 2.2.9-1 ??
I'll venture out on a limb and say you configured the kernel slightly different that your previous one. Perhaps some certain code was compiled in the kernel, rather than a module, or perhaps you omitted an unused feature this time, who knows. I've done that a few times, and I was like, "Wow, whatever I did differently this time seemed to work pretty darn good". I dunno. I haven't looked at the 2.3.x stuff yet, but from what I heard, it should be a (close-to) verbatim copy of 2.2.8/9.
nothing wrong with a bit of 'healthy' competition
The reason Rob has worked hard is to keep people like you happy, by being able to filter out stuff such as this. Now I know this won't help those wanting linux, but not kernels update, but as I saw someone else say, these updates will slow quite a bit in a couple months. Relax. I'm sure you will be able to find happiness in life. What rob does w/ slashdot won't deprive you.
http://www.somethingpositive.net Funny + bitter = comedy gold
I think it would be nice to have the kernels up on CVS, but I don't think they should break the style of the current releases, ie linus puts them out when neccesary. Really, the advantage would just be for ppl who really dig or for some odd reason, only have access to a CVS tree.
But ya know what? I'd bet cash that someone already has this setup for those who really need it. I doubt there'd be demand enough from everyone else.
http://www.somethingpositive.net Funny + bitter = comedy gold
wouldn't the next stable version after 2.2.x be 3.0?
What is everyone complaining about? I think this simply has to do with the fact that the 2.2 series added a whole slew of stuff that was in the dev series. This means that now all of the sudden a bunch more people are using all of this previously devel code, and most likely finding bugs and other issues.
I would much rather have 10 kernel updates come out in 3 1/2 months, then say three come out in 10 months. If you don't need the new stuff or don't like screwing around with rebuilding your kernel, then don't worry about the new release unless you know you need it. Enough said.
I think I would be in heaven if only I could find a Linux job.
I doubt this would be the case, unless the kernel folks didn't read
Mindcraft's publication on the matter.. (which is also doubtful, as
you'd think that if they were releasing the patches for it, they'd at
least have found out what the nitty gritty details..) (hmm, nice
circular piece of logic on my part there, but I hope you catch my
drift...)
Specifically, the Mindcraft paper stated that the Linux team would be
unable to use any patches not publicly available before April 20.
Is it that hard for you people to look at a release?You don't have to get it, say if you had a certain type of cdrom and the last kernel had a bug which wouldn't let it be mounted and the new one fixed it, I'm sure you'd be appreciative if you want a system that doesn't fix there mistakes goto windows
I am getting really SICK of the number of kernels being released all the time... Its just plain annoying. How about releasing them as development releases UNTILL their as sufficient changes so as to say you should upgrade to this kernel ? Splatty
Shall I apply the 2.2.9 patch and follow the stable path, or wait for 2.3.1 and lead an exciting but dangerous life?
2 = Major version
2 = Minor version
8 = Micro version
At least where I grew up.
I don't understand it. There are a lot of new kernel releases coming out lately, one might say that they are being released one after another in rapid-fire succession, however, wouldn't it be much easier to use CVS (GNU), perhaps along with CVSup (which is essentially 'cvs update' on steroids - including an optional X UI and protocol compression) to keep its users up-to-date on the kernel sources? I believe I understand the Linus-final-word structure, but a one-man CVS operation would still be worth it if one can download only the latest updated sources from the tree.
This is, as some of you may know, the way FreeBSD keeps its whole OS tree (since it is, after all, one integrated operating system), as well as splitting the source tree (kernel and userland) into CURRENT, STABLE, and RELEASE (essentially a frozen -STABLE from a specific time), and I think it would be very valuble for Linux to do the same thing.
Comments? Flames?
Interesting note: FreeBSD mirrors use CVSup to update a CVS tree, so that users may use those mirrors which have mirrored the entire CVS tree on their system, to download either just the latest sources, or to download the actual CVS tree, on which one can make the usual CVS operations (useful for extensive work on things, such as the FAQ or Handbook, which I happen to work on)
No, my poor unimaginative little friend. I used a Slowaris box in the campus computing lab.
...signed, the ever-lovable gnulix guy!
Some people have had problems with Oracle on Linux after upgrading to 2.2.9. Matthew (mattshouse.com, an Oracle / Linux) emailed Alan Cox with some details, and received this response, which seems germain to this discussion ...
(Matthew wrote)
>I just received this e-mail from Alan Cox:
>>2.2.8 has an fs deadlock and an exploitable remote network crash problem.
>>2.2.9 will be appearing rather shortly
(end quoted email)
Oracle users should definitely avoid 2.2.8, and it would seem that the problems Alan notes could affect non-Oracle things as well, hmmm?
Best Regards,
BillyG.