Linux Kernel 2.6.7 Released 303
conrausch writes "German Heise News reports among others that the new Linux Kernel 2.6.7 was just released, and that it fixes the previously mentioned bug in the floating point exception handling. Whether or not you offer shell access to other people, get it now from kernel.org or one of the mirrors."
Got it (Score:5, Informative)
System doesn't seem to run much different, I haven't read the changelog
but for those of you who want to read the changelog it can be found HERE:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/Cha
Err (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Got it (Score:3, Informative)
Here's a good link
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/Chang
AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE!
Re:Well I'll be... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:NVidia? (Score:2, Informative)
(but to answer your question, its working fine on my box)
English: Linux Today has human redable changelog (Score:5, Informative)
Re:what about 2.4? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:what about 2.4? (Score:1, Informative)
Think of the odd versions as release candidates, if youre from a Windows world!
Re:APIC Fix? (Score:2, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:what about 2.4? (Score:2, Informative)
It became 2.6 and has been supplanted by 2.7.
That's the way things work around here, odd numbered point releases always being development models for the next stable release which is always even numbered.
There are a lot of good reasons for maintaining older stable releases. Maintaining obsolete development models would be a bit silly.
KFG
Re:what about 2.4? (Score:5, Informative)
The driver architecture in Linux kernel 2.6 changed somewhat from 2.4. Drivers will have to be patched or rewritten to work with 2.6. This is being worked on, but lots of unofficial patches to the kernel haven't caught up yet. My laptop, for instance, was unable to get X up at adequate resolutions with 2.6 (albeit this was around christmas - I might give it another shot with this release).
Then there's low-level userspace programs (stuff not running as a part of the kernel itself) that needs some change. Examples are the PCMCIA-suite.
Re:Problems with JFS? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Obligatory luser question (Score:2, Informative)
This is needed if they have ftp/cgi access (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Obligatory luser question (Score:3, Informative)
The question is, when will this patch show up on other distributions. People are sometimes not able to compile a vanilla kernel or a vanilla kernel can cause headache, e.g. SuSE 9.1 formats your filesystem with reiserfs and ACLs, but a vanilla kernel might not support this backported ACL feature.
Seen the kernel release from this point of view means, that the sistributions should hurry up to provide fixed kernel packages for their users.
what really chaps my ass is (Score:0, Informative)
Linux Linux Linux......Big fucking deal.
Re:Woohoo, another kernel compile. (Score:2, Informative)
cp patch-2.6.7.bz2
cd
mv linux-2.6.6 linux-2.6.7
bunzip2 patch-2.6.7.bz2
cd linux-2.6.7
cp
make mrproper
cat
make mrproper
cp
make oldconfig
make && make clean modules modules_install install
vi
reboot
Not to difficult. Could make it into a script, to bad I'm going to loose my uptime to patch the kernel, but oh well. Shit happens.
Re:Just curious (Score:2, Informative)
bwindle@balrog:~$ uptime
09:06:48 up 36 days, 22:03, 2 users, load average: 1.00, 0.55, 0.43
bwindle@balrog:~$ uname -a
Linux balrog 2.6.6 #3 SMP Mon May 10 10:55:43 EDT 2004 i686 GNU/Linux
Re:Is it just me, (Score:3, Informative)
Some even say, that the kernel isn't stable till at least
It sure seemed that way when it went from 2.2 to 2.4
The 2.4.0 to 2.4.10 seemed like overnight, and then it slowed down to a small humm
Re:Is it just me, (Score:5, Informative)
2.6, while "stable", is still under development. It seems a little inconsistent, but it seems to work - the kernel guys get it reasonably stable for 2.6.0, a horde of regular users gets it and so there's more feedback/bug reports, and it all develops quite fast for a while, eventually everything calms down and the Downtime Costs Me $1000 A Minute people pick it up, and the kernel guys get to work on a (much more fun, I'm sure) unstable (odd-numbered) branch. At least that's how it looks to me...
Re:Just curious (Score:3, Informative)
It's running a Qmail/Courier IMAP server w/ webmail interface. And it's running a rather busy nfs/samba server.
I had it running on a second NFS/Samba server that was using LVM2 (only difference that I can tell). With the 2.6 kernel I got kernel panics 2-3 times a week. So I went down to the 2.4 kernel and it hasn't crashed since.
Re:Is it just me, (Score:5, Informative)
What, are you afraid they're suddenly going to run out of numbers for the 2.6.xx branch?
Yes. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Just curious (Score:4, Informative)
Similar experience here. Had 2.6.3, if I remember well, with LVM, software RAID5 and ext3. Didn't got kernel panics, but abort logs that forced a reboot 'cause the filesystems were remounted readonly. Eventually I lost the /, so backed down to 2.4.
Tried to follow the issues in the relevant mailing lists, there was little interest by the powers that be.
I guess Tannenbaun was right, monolithic kerni are getting just too complex. If only the Hurd got critical mass...
Re:Time for download then (Score:3, Informative)
ATI's Radeon 9800 Pro technical issues page [ati.com]
A LinuxQuestions.org thread [linuxquestions.org] on ATI with the NForce2 on Mandrake 10.0.
This is the i386 patch for 2.4 (Score:2, Informative)
The 2.4 patch for i386 is here:
http://linux.bkbits.net:8080/linux-2.4/diffs/incl
Re:what about 2.4? (Score:3, Informative)
So, 2.4.25 wasn't a development version, even though it ends in an odd number. The last number just indicates a minor version revision and it's still considered stable.
Re:Just curious (Score:5, Informative)
In particular, my HT machines seem to perform very well with 2.6.3 and up.
Re:Woohoo, another kernel compile. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Now everyone... (Score:2, Informative)
Re: Not upgrading... (Score:2, Informative)
Kernel 2.6.3 had a very broken OSS ALSA emulation layer. This is why I switched down to 2.6.2. Version 2.6.5 and above have a major ALSA fix. So if you use your soundcard at all, then it is definitely worth it to upgrade.
Re:NVidia? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:-mm patches? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Obligatory luser question (Score:2, Informative)
1) su -
Not neccessary at this early step, ie. not needed for compiling the kernel. Do a 'su' when you are about to install the compiled kernel&modules.
2) cd
5) ln -s
Not needed. 5) is actually discouraged by Linus. Just unpack the linux kernel sources somewhere and cd into that directory.
9) make bzImage
10) make modules
both commands are only needed for 2.4.x kernels and if you compile a kernel for the ix86 platform. If you are using 2.6.x, you should simply do a 'make'.
11) cd arch/i386/boot
12) cp bzImage
13) edit
are also only needed if you compile for the Linux/ix86 platform. 13) only applies if you are using GRUB as a bootloader on a RedHat system. BTW, GRUB's config file is usually in
You are also missing a 'make modules_install' and it might be a good idea to save your System.map and
Instead of 11-12) you might want to do a simple 'make install' (for 2.6.x kernels). Also try out 'make help'.
Re:Obligatory luser question (Score:2, Informative)
Re:APIC Fix? (Score:2, Informative)
So far as I know those fixes went in to 2.6.6. Unfortunately, as a result of not being able to move to 2.6.6 yet, I haven't been able to test this fix (My two primary machines have NForce2 chipsets), but supposedly it's fixed.
Supermount (Score:5, Informative)
If you want to upgrade for security reasons, but you also want supermount in your kernel (as I do), this guy [optusnet.com.au] seems to have a patch for 2.6.7, which might come in handy if you don't want to wait for your distro to catch up. I am going to use this patch myself, but I cannot guarantee that it won't bone your system so to speak. The patch is not just supermount, it looks like it has some other stuff in it too, so decide for yourself!
Seeing as how I'm posting this, I may as well give a little background for those not "in the know". Supermount is a sort of filesystem, you mount your CD-ROM and floppy drives (or even USB sticks) with it, and it will automatically mount and unmount the media when you insert or remove it, kind of like on Windows. Personally, I think it is great, and it is hard to live without it now I have it.
You can learn more about it at the project website. [sourceforge.net] Jeez, if it turns out the vanilla kernel does have supermount after all, I am going to look a right idiot... *presses Submit*