Kernel 2.6.12 Released 291
Mad Merlin writes "Linux kernel 2.6.12 has been released! Kerneltrap has a brief summary on it. The changelog is only partial however: 'The full ChangeLog ended up missing, because I only have the history from 2.6.12-rc2 in my git archives, but if you want to, you can puzzle it together by taking the 2.6.12 changelog and merging it with the -rc1 and -rc2 logs in the testing directory. The file that says ChangeLog-2.6.12 only contains the stuff from -rc2 onward.' As always you can find the changelog and the source at kernel.org"
Now, there's the right message (Score:5, Insightful)
Nothing instills confidence in those who are not convinced that Linux is mature enough for their application like the messages: "I was too lazy to download these files to put together a changelog" and
"the changelog wasn't in our CMS."
Re:Now, there's the right message (Score:1, Insightful)
Linux+OpenSolaris (Score:1, Insightful)
Stupidest thing I've ever read, right there (Score:0, Insightful)
Re:Now, there's the right message (Score:2, Insightful)
Priorities (Score:3, Insightful)
This is the type of thing that happens when engineers manage projects rather than business people. That's not a criticism.
Making it stable... (Score:2, Insightful)
at least subsystem by subsystem,
for a couple of months and perform
a deep code review (ala OpenBSD)
for bug hunting and security analysis.
I can understand that some part of the kernel
still needs heavy development
(ReiserFS, VM, some specific broken drivers),
but other parts should be revised
and certified gold bug free.
At least that would give us a roadmap,
on what is to be fixed before
they jump to 2.7.x series.
I mean what's the point to break stuff
at every
that doesn't make any sense to me.
How are 3rd party drivers people, applications
are supposed to "trust" a 2.6 kernel,
if it break stuff continuously.
"You're Nvidia or ATI card works in 2.6.x but not in 2.6.x+2,
and VMware doesn't work in 2.6.y but only in 2.6.y+1"
As long as they keep breaking stuff,
I'm keeping my "stable" linux servers
on the 2.4.x series.
Re:borked (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Just after ATI... (Score:5, Insightful)
As someone who specifically uses 2.4.x kernels due to certain support issues, I give you permission not to upgrade. Matter of fact to go further I give you this checklist to decide any and all software upgrades in the future:
Does your current software solve your needs?
Does the upgrade mess with something you care about?
Does the upgrade fix a vital security issue?
Are you a developer?
I would discuss the answers in an if.. then... else sort of way. But, if you can upgrade your kernel you should be able to figure it out. Oh, one more thing, if you do not know the answer to any of these questions, you shouldn't even think about upgrading. Do not run code simply because it has been written. Code is written to address needs, use the code that was wrtten for yours and be happy that there is code for other people to.
Re:Now, there's the right message (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:One thing I'm a bit confused about... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Maybe? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Maybe? (Score:3, Insightful)
No.
You don't need to release a new driver with every kernel release. ATI just has no idea what they're doing that's all.
A good example: When 2.6 first came out, the nvidia 2.4 kernel module could be made to compile with only minor modifications! I upgrade kernels with every release, and I've never had to go out and find a new driver release.
But to answer your question, the reason why most manufacturers don't put a high priority on Linux support is because the amount of effort it takes is simply not worth the trouble. Linux just doesn't have the install base.
On the other hand, if you're a cool company, and a lot of your engineers, devs, etc already use Linux, or *BSD then the effort it takes is much smaller, because they already know the system.
Ever compared the install between ATI and Nvidia. ATI's is a freakin' joke. It's horrible.
You know they basically took some of their people, forced them to slap something resemembling driver support together and released it on the public.
I agree with the grandparent post. Reward nvidia with your money. Quit your bitching, stop all the silly petitions to try to get ATI to release decent drivers. All that does is let them know they can do it and people will still buy them!
Re:Now, there's the right message (Score:3, Insightful)
Ironically, even ones who wouldn't have been concerned if it had never been mentioned at all.
Quite a few businesses put a greater value on the paper trail than the quality of the system.
Re:Maybe? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Maybe? (Score:3, Insightful)
Reward nvidia for releasing *binary* drivers? Anybody with an interest in the long-term success of Linux should be *punishing* nvidia by NOT buying their hardware.
Reward the companies that produce open source drivers, or publish specs, or help the developers of open-source drivers. Don't reward companies who are destroying the core value of Linux.
Re:Maybe? (Score:5, Insightful)
Without a proper nvidia driver, Linux would be basically useless for any real modern desktop use, as all we'd have is driver support comparable to say that of any of the other open sourced ones, SiS, via, intel, matrox, the open source nvidia, or ATI drivers. Which by the way all tremendously suck. Sure basic 2d operations are supported, but that's it.
nvidia is under no obligation to release the internals of their product, and why would they in such a competetive market!
Punishing nvidia for running a good, smart business, and support free and alternative operating systems with quality products is an absolutely ridiculous thing to say.
Before you spout your mouth off like that, I'd like to see you create and maintain the number one graphics card company in the world, then release the source code to your driver which would give your competitors a HUGE leg up on understanding the internals of your product.
Don't be such an idealistic ass. It's people like YOU that destroy the core value of Linux.
Re:Maybe? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Maybe? (Score:2, Insightful)
With Linux, yes it is. If you don't care about open-source then use something else.
Idealism is not a dirty word. Idealism means seeing the bigger picture and foregoing fleeting fancies in the pursuit of long-term success. If you're too short-sighted to understand that then perhaps Linux is not for you.
Re:Maybe? (Score:3, Insightful)
I didn't mean you have to change the driver itself. This would be impossible as it's a closed source binary only driver!
I just meant minor modifications to the system. And I was talking about a fringe case: the case where a whole new version of the kernel is released (not just a point release). If you think about this it speaks very well on nvidia's behalf.
Also, in their favor, they released a 2.6 version soon after the release of 2.6. (No modifications necessary).
My point, which you completely missed, was that you do NOT need to upgrade your driver every time a kernel point release is made, and I was talking about a very extreme case where nvidia really shone.
Re:Maybe? (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree. Unfortunately, the desktop video card market is largely binary (NVIDIA/ATI), and NVIDIA is clearly superior in their support for Linux. There are many theoretical and practical problems with binary drivers, but NVIDIA has gotten it mostly right. ATI's Linux drivers are awful, which is why I'll never buy their cards.
Re:Maybe? (Score:3, Insightful)
With Linux, open source *is* the real issue.
The core value of Linux is that it is open source.
Good. Linux will be better off without them if the mere mention of "open source" is enough to scare them away.
Re:Maybe? (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, real big of nVidia to release closed, binary drivers that may or may not run on different configurations and most assuredly will not run on anything other than Linux/i386, and to make no mention whatsoever of hardware specifications or documentation. Really nice, how they've ensured that there will be no non-trivial open development of their drivers by providing a buggy, impractical, but "good enough" solution.
nVidia is ensuring that F/OSS graphics will continue to be criplled by establishing an inadequate and, in the long run, harmful status quo. Until some company comes along that releases specifications---not even drivers, just specifications---for its graphics cards, I will not spend a single penny on them. Closed drivers don't help me run Blender or play games under *BSD, or do much of anything at all on a non-i386 architecture, anywhere, so I'm not going to bother with them. Frankly, there's something to be said for the hardline, "we won't take it unless it's Free" approach that, e.g., the OpenBSD guys have taken.
Re:2.6.13 (Score:3, Insightful)
It sounds like a worse situation than it is: it can depend on your perspective. There are often patches that float around and never get integrated but usually there's a good reason for that (code quality sucks, minimal testing, breaks other stuff, not conforming to kernel coding style).
Speaking of Kernel Coding Style, are you claiming that this is unimportant? Do you understand the concept that once a piece of code makes it into Linux then it's supposed to be maintainable by a group of people? You realise that the original maintainer of a piece of code is free to walk away at any time, so if they've used their own funky style the code will be obfuscated and unmaintainable?
Have a look at the recent discussion wrt inotify! It's an important feature for the desktop IMNSHO but core maintainers are sticking their noses up at it. Is this a bad thing? If you are more interested in the functionality than you are in the opinion that it's "Just Not Right Yet(tm)" then maybe. I'm really keen to see it in but I'm sincerely appreciative that Christopher Hellwig criticises and vetos the work until it conforms to his idea of aesthetics and sanity. CH can be a hard-liner but people like him, Andrew Morton and Al Viro raise the bar and push for quality. This is inarguably A Good Thing.
Anyway, mistakes happen, patches get ignored, people crack the sads, life goes on. Problems occur in commercial software development too. It's not time to ring the alarm bells.
Cheers
Stor
Re:Maybe? (Score:2, Insightful)
The main thing to remember is to have an open mind and accept that people use their computers for different reasons than you and thus place their priorities in different areas. That's not a bad thing (even if it means they use Microsoft products).
Re:Maybe? (Score:3, Insightful)
>With Linux, yes it is. If you don't care about open-source then use something else.
What? I don't recall Linus Torvalds (the creator of Linux), saying that the whole point of Linux is to run entirely open source software. Perhaps you can find a quote, either from Torvalds or from the kernal copyright licence that says you're not supposed to use any non-open-source software on Linux.
The way I see it, Linux was created to be a decent Unix-alternative, the fact that it's open source is a bonus. Who are you to tell people what operating system to use because they don't follow your ideology. I could equally say that if you don't want binary-only Nvidia drivers then use another graphics card.
Idealism means seeing the bigger picture and foregoing fleeting fancies in the pursuit of long-term success.
What bigger picture is this? Are you saying that using your hardware is a 'fleeting fancy'? Where is the long-term success in having your hardware non-operative? Perhaps you think that Nvidia will open the source of their drivers if enough open-source zealots use 640x480 16 colours because they won't install the closed-source drivers.
If you're too short-sighted to understand that then perhaps Linux is not for you.
Repeat after me: (This also goes for the zealots who modded your hilariously close-minded rant to +4)
LINUX IS AN OPERATING SYSTEM, NOT A RELIGION. IT'S A MEANS TO AN END THAT MAKES YOUR WEB BROWSER AND EMAIL WORK, THE WORLD DOES NOT REVOLVE AROUND IT.
Re:Wrong word (Score:3, Insightful)
He did use the word zealot. It's very amusing because apparently a lot of you think "zealot" is an insult. I'm not insulted by that word at all. I'm proud to be a zealot.
I pity all of you people who are so jaded with life that you can only express yourself with anger and cynicism. It's so... teenager. Try being a zealot. It's much more fun.
PS: the word you should have used is "pedestal". HTH. HAND.