Linux 2.6.0 Kernel Released

thenextpresident writes "It's here! Just updated on kernel.org, the Linux 2.6.0 kernel has finally arrived! We've been waiting a long time for this, and it had been rumored it was going to be released tonight. Well, it's here indeed. Happy downloading." There's also a changelog online for this long-awaited update.

Re:How does this benefit me?

[ameoba]

If you put a .0 kernel on your cluster at work, expect to lose your grants and your job.

Re:How does this benefit me?

[Kourino]

The Changelog is only the changes from 2.6.0-test11 to 2.6.0, which isn't very illuminating at all.

Re:How does this benefit me?

[cookie_cutter]

Where would these release notes be? Surely you don't refer to the cryptic changelog. Googling "linux 2.6 release notes" [google.com] didn't turn up anything relevant. I tried one thing and I'm out of ideas(if it ain't in google, it don't exist ;) !

So if you know of release notes that will clearly answer my question, please post a link.

Re:How does this benefit me?

[mattdm]

Unless your job and grants have to do with or would benefit from cutting edge linux kernels. 'Cause then, presumably, you can keep them.

Re:I don't see a fix.

[OneFix]

Did I say that preempt would be working like clockwork?

No, if you install this kernel on anything but a test box, you're stoopid...You should wait till the minor releases are at least a month or 2 apart before you EVEN consider upgrading to a 2.6 kernel...or better yet, wait for Fedora Core 2 in April...

Re:LotR:RotK + Kernel = Early Christmas

[DCowern]

How do you know Linus did not release this before or after seeing LOTR:RotK? Or even during...

Because Andrew Morton, not Linus, would have been the one to release 2.6.0. That's how. :-P

Re:Lunix now almost as usable as WINDOWS 95!!!

[sloanster]

You have to laugh at the anonymous jerks who have nothing better to do than hang out on slashdot and make fools of themselves -

In the first place, he is confused about the difference between a desktop environment and a kernel, but attempts to talk a good game anyway.

LOL, what sort of sad life do these trolls have?

:::yhbt

[Fecal Troll Matter]

By responding, you are the fool.

asl?

Re:I don't see a fix.

[OneFix]

No, not really...I didn't say "wait till 2.6.10" or some arbitrary number...but the longer time between updates implies more stability and less intrusive bugs...it happens with all software...many ppl haven't even upgraded to Solaris 9 yet...and 10 is due out soon...

Software has bugs...it's a fact...and newly released software is bound to have some hairy ones...at ~2 months time, there will either be a new minor release or a lot of ppl complaining if it's still unstable...

It's not a M$ thing...it's good administration...it's also why some ppl are still using 2.2 or even 2.0 kernels...

Re:Why is this news?

[joshua42]

You do however have a point, I think. Microsoft has been mocked about their inflated version numbering scheme. Linux is doing just the opposite. The convention for software X.Y.Z is:

X - major release
Y - incremental release with additional features
Z - release featuring only bugfixes

Had Linux adopted that system we would not have had the pointless 2.6 vs. 3.0 discussion on when changes are "big enough".

Major releases equals major numbers, simple. It is not like we will be running out of numbers by using up a new major one every two years or so.

Re:mmmKay

[GreyWolf3000]

Linux is a process, not a product.

Re:I don't see a fix.

[Trepalium]

I would disagree. 2.6.0 has not recieved the kind of testing 2.4.23, for example, has. There will be drivers that are subtly broken, and things that just aren't right. Bug fixes to the stable kernels don't always make it to the unstable versions, especially when the driver model changes drastically (and it did in 2.5/2.6). The kernel itself should be fairly stable under almost any load, but it'll take 2.6.2 or so to get the driver issues ironed out.

While I was testing 2.6.0-test1 through -test6 on my laptop, I could never get it to stop hanging after 10-60 minutes of use (stupid 'legacy-free' design makes it really hard to catch panics/oopses). On my desktop machine, I was unable to use it because my Promise ATA [fake]RAID controller isn't properly supported by 2.6.x

Re:NOT OT

[lintux]

If both ide-cd and ide-scsi are used as a module, I don't see why you can't just load and unload the correct modules when you want to change modes.

But OTOH, why would you want to do that anyway? With ide-scsi, you can do everything you need to do with the drive, I don't see why you can't just use that mode all the time.

The wonders of....

[Kjella]

...anecdotal evidence. So do we have any real scientific stress tests of Linux's NTFS write capability? With all due respect, the parent post sounds like "I tried it once, and it worked! => Linux NTFS support is perfect"

So does it work:
a) Sometimes
b) All the time (we hope... maybe)
c) Good enough for common users
d) Production quality

On a wild guess, I don't think it'd d) just yet...

Kjella

Re:NOT OT

[jusdisgi]

"But Windows can seemlessly change between SCSI-emulation and IDE, without requiring boottime option (allthough a reboot is required for installation)."

This sounds very unlikely to me. I admit, I don't really know, having not owned a windows computer in a few years...but I can't see any conceivable way this could be true. Does windows have some right-click option on the drive letter that has a check-box for "use scsi-emulation" or something?

I think it is much much more likely that either a)windows leaves the drive in scsi-emu mode all the time, or b)windows loads normal ide stuff, and nero/roxio/whatever loads up the scsi-emu.

The big question is "can you really tell windows to turn scsi-emu on/off?" I doubt it.

Re:Pull yourself together man

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm. Does it assume that after five minutes of waiting that it should just go ahead? Otherwise it would still be waiting when you got home and while it would save you having to type the three or four characters to correct a mistyped command, it would not get your kernel compiled any sooner.

To solve the problem once and for all one would sensibly use the alias command in the .[shell]rc file.

Re:What happens after 2.8 ??

[TeknoHog]

Hint: 2.6.0 has two dots, but decimal numbers only have one. The version number is an ordered triplet of integers, which is why there are things like Linux 2.4.23. However, some pieces of software use decimal version numbers, like TeX 3.14159.

Re:How does this benefit me?

[pclminion]

If you put a .0 kernel on your cluster at work, expect to lose your grants and your job.

That's not insightful, it's corporate bullshit.

If nobody is willing to test the new kernel on clusters, guess what? It'll never get the bugs worked out to run on clusters. Sure, that "all important" version number might click over to .2, and then .3... But so what? If you don't test it on clusters, it'll have bugs on clusters. (I hope this concept is not too complex for you.)

Yeah, I'm sure you'll wait until the mighty .1 release. And then you'll be the one under the gun, since nobody tested the .0 release, as per your (extremely deluded) advice.

I suppose you expect the kernel hackers to go out and buy a half-million dollar cluster to do the testing for us? How many arbitrary version numbers do you think we should wait before we jump in?

Way to be massively ignorant.