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)
Lots of people download the kernel. It's much more efficient to just have tarballs for people to download. :)
Consider the whole Mindcraft deal. Now consider that, according to ESR's CandB paper that part of the motivation for creating open source software is satisfaction of ego. Now imagine you're kernel hacker and MS has, either by design or accident, thrown down the gauntlet. Note to large, Redmond based software companies: Mindcraft is a loss even if it's a win. Let it lay....all you're going to do is make it worse.
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
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) -
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.
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)
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.