Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux Kernel 2.2.10ac11 Released

Posted by Roblimo on from the nothing-huge-but-lots-of-little-updates dept.

Full details on this page at Linux Today, where Alan Cox says, "A lot of updates here. I've not chased down the lockd bug reports yet, nor the umount nfsd bug that is trapped by the SLAB debugging. This mops up most of the stuff while I've been occupied elsewhere. Chances are given the number of updates there will be a few glitches in it. Have fun testing."

11 of 42 comments (clear)

  1. Re:it isn't a mistake. by Trepidity · · Score: 2

    then go read freshmeat

    --
    10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
  2. Re:DON'T RUN 2.2.8!! by Trepidity · · Score: 2

    That's why I consider the current Linux release cycle to be a failure. You should not have to have a list of which kernels are stable or not, since 2.2.x is supposedly the stable tree. ALL kernels released in 2.2.x should be 99.9% stable. In other words, more ac prepatches would be nice, and delay the "official" kernel releases until you really have something worthy of the "stable" label.

    When you have a stable tree with severe bugs, that doesn't make people confident in your product. I personally wouldn't recommend anybody use anything higher than 2.0.37 for any important applications, since the 2.2.x line is simply not stable enough.

    --
    10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
  3. Re:DON'T RUN 2.2.8!! by Trepidity · · Score: 2

    Sure, I understand that there's some limit to the testing that can be done, but more than is currently done is possible. With companies like RedHat, Caldera, and VA having quite a bit of money, they could at least try out 10 or 15 different hardware configurations, not just what they happen to have on their personal boxes at the moment. Also, no new features should be added to 2.2.x. They should go into 2.3.x.

    --
    10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
  4. Re:DON'T RUN 2.2.8!! by Trepidity · · Score: 2

    Then perhaps Linux and Alan Cox need to take some lessons from Red Hat. I'd rather run a stable 2.2.5 that has some of the 2.2.6+ features than run a 2.2.10 (with very few additional features) that's a lot less stable.

    --
    10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
  5. Re:version number by kronos · · Score: 2

    If you see a linux kernel numbered with an ac__ at the end, like "2.2.10ac11", it means that it's based on 2.2.10, patched with the eleventh patch written for that kernel by Alan Cox (ac). Since it's not an official "Linus-blessed" version of linux, he increments his own counter after the "ac". Usually, most or all of alan's patches get included in the following version of linux (in this case, that'd be 2.2.11).

    For freedom,
    kronos.

  6. I just want to say by IntlHarvester · · Score: 2


    Thank god for the Compaq Smart2 array driver support. I've got a few "outdated" Proliants just looking for something to run.
    --

    --
    Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
  7. 2.2.10, out since June 13 by crow · · Score: 2

    2.2.10 was released on June 13, based on the timestamps I see at my kernel.org mirror site. However, there are some obscure file corruption bugs in 2.2.9 and 2.2.10 that they've been working on finding, so I would consider 2.2.8 to be the latest stable version. That bug is the reason you haven't seen 2.2.11 in over a month.

    Personally, I live on the edge with 2.3.11-pre5. So what if FAT file system support is broken? That's what development kernels are all about.

  8. Alan Cox by crow · · Score: 3

    Alan may be mostly running the 2.2 tree. He certainly ran the 2.0 tree long after Linus had moved totally to 2.1. However, when it comes time to release the next official version, Alan still gets Linus's approval first.

    In many cases, the AC patches include things that Linus has specifically said won't make it into his kernel, or at least not in the 2.2 kernel. I'm not sure if that is still the case, though, now that 2.3 is underway--most of those patches that Linus wasn't ready to accept into 2.2 are now in 2.3.

    Anyway, we can expect to see Alan working on both 2.2 and 2.3 until 2.4 comes out.

  9. Re:DON'T RUN 2.2.8!! by crow · · Score: 3

    Thanks. I missed that.

    This brings up an important point: We need a good resource to check to see which kernel versions are stable.

    Imagine the following fictional site (infomation is fictional, too):

    www.kernelbugs.org/2.2/

    2.2.0
    Has severe problem with the wigglenet driver.

    2.2.6
    Improved memory management for better SMP performance.

    2.2.8
    Severe memory system problems

    2.2.9
    Mysterious and rare file corruption bug, possibly actually due to faulty hardware.

    2.2.10
    File corruption bug still not fixed.

    Most stable version: 2.2.7
    High performance version: 2.2.10

    The idea is to have a review of different kernel releases at a higher level than just what features have been tweaked. Something where an experienced user can figure out easily what kernel makes the most sense.

  10. Like this? by PhoboS · · Score: 3

    So what you want is something like Kernel Newsflash?

    --

    Phobos - Greek word for fear or flight

  11. Interesting ... by Pingo · · Score: 2

    I would like to see more of what the *BSD guys are doing. I know that they are also doing great stuff. Some is better than Linux and some isn't.

    It would need an update to the slashdot site. Split slashdot into departments. One Techie department where Linux/*BSD can discuss things close to their hart. Stuff that is to heavy for the causal visitors to slashdot.

    I guess the guys running slashdot pretty well knows what the other departments should be.

    //Pingo

    --
    --- Linux or FreeBSD, it's like blondes or brunettes. I like both. ---