Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Alan Cox says 2.4 Kernel in November

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the wouldn't-it-be-nice dept.

BoNeS writes "Alan Cox, revealed at the first ever UK Linux Expo that the 2.4 kernel of Linux could be available for developers everywhere as soon as November. Cox also revealed that in a couple of weeks he will be working "directly" for the most successful commercial Linux distributors by contracting programmers for their European operations."

2 of 70 comments (clear)

  1. ZDnet Journalists Getting A Little Confused by Alan+Cox · · Score: 5
    November = Code Freeze. I don't think the ZDnet guy quite understood the different phases of getting to 2.4. I guess I should have drawn him a little map or something


    The full guess I gave ZD is - code freeze November, 2.4pre December, 2.4 march or so. I know Linus wants to get things moving rapidly on that. But only Linus (and I doubt even Linus) has a totally clear timetable 8)


    As to the other stuff thats mostly pretty accurate. Currently I run building #3 which is mostly contracting for Red Hat. With Red Hat europe in place this no longer makes sense. Lest anyone is worried about that I can assure them that part of the paperwork we are putting in place is something both Red Hat as well as I wanted to be sure we had there - which guarantees appropriate degress of autonomy.


    Hello to everyone I met both at the show.


    Alan

  2. 2.4 should be "Early Adopter Only" first by FutileRedemption · · Score: 4


    Gone are the times when only unix hackers used new Linux releases.

    This means: A kernel officially released as "Release" should be VERY stable. Stable enough for anyone to put it on his most important servers, without a second thought.

    Remember the problems the 2.2 series went through. Even 2.2.12 is not yet completely there. 2.2.13 or 14 might effectively be.

    Maybe a new version tag is needed, additionally to the the odd numbers, and the "pre" and "ac" tags.
    Like "ea" for "early adopter". Whatever. Anything above "beta".

    The distributions would offer two kernels then: "ea" and "stable as hell".

    And "stable as hell" is what "release" should mean.

    PS: Potential deficiencies in the NT release versions are not really of interest here. Linux can do better. The people in control of the kernel dont need to care about public company quarter results.