Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Linux 2.6.0-test9 Released 262

Posted by timothy from the asymptotia dept.
keesh writes "Linux kernel 2.6.0-test9 is now out. Changes include SATA support and XFS and CIFS fixes. Because of the change freeze, this is a fairly minor update. In the announcement, Linus suggests that -test10 will be the final release before 2.6.0-final. Don't forget to use a mirror."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux 2.6.0-test9 Released More

Linux 2.6.0-test9 Released

Comments Filter:

  • Whoa... (Score:2, Funny)

    by Sp4c3 C4d3t ( 607082 )
    So it's finally almost here. Is the framebuffer fixed yet?
    • Not according to the announcement. Just wait for the -mm patch. It is really great. The whole thing is snappy, and gives new life to a lot of machines.

    • Re:Whoa... (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      There are still a lot of problems with fb in 2.6 and will be for several versions judging from the development. But there's some interesting [theaimsgroup.com] conversations regarding graphics on the lkml.
      • I haven't noticed any problem with framebuffer, however I don't use XDirectFB or anything like that. I heard the test8-mm1 and test8-love1 was a mess because of the new fbdev patch that came out, causing problems mounting drives for some people. However, I didn't use mm1 this time, I used the plain vanilla, even the 2.4 patch to raise the vesafb refresh rate worked with a little editing of the locations of the directories.

  • torrent link (Score:3, Informative)

    by Wakkow ( 52585 ) * on Saturday October 25, 2003 @09:40PM (#7311659) Homepage
    Although mirrors will probably be faster, if anyone wants the torrent, I set one up:

    http://69.56.172.70/linux-2.6.0-test9.tar.bz2.torr ent [69.56.172.70]
    • The pgp signature on this verifies correctly. This is a valid copy, not some jerk.

      Thanks Wakkow!

      • Re:torrent link (Score:4, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 25, 2003 @10:38PM (#7311946)
        Wow, really helpful! :)
        I'll just take your word for it and you just saved me the effort of actually checking the hash.
        Your ideas on hash-check-optimizing might even revolutionize the whole industry.
        Plus imaginary authentication feels so much safer!
        • I'll just take your word for it and you just saved me the effort of actually checking the hash.

          Slashdot has been saying "use the mirrors" for every version of the kernel. Someone always posts a torrent link. Flamewars about the risk of using "unofficial" torrents ensues. This leads one to ask "why the heck doesn't kernel.org host a torrent of their own?" I'm sure it would save them enough bandwidth to cover the cost of introducing the feature.

      • Re:torrent link (Score:3, Informative)

        by Wakkow ( 52585 ) *
        I should have thought to include a link to the pgp sig.. It's true no one should blindly trust unofficial sources. Thanks DD.
    • I was under the impression that kernel.org has more bandwidth than God. I suppose this might be relevant when 2.6.0-release comes out, but are that many people really running the test kernel of the day?
    • Theres a valid torrent link at http://www.distributedbandwidth.info/torrentmap/ex plorer.jsp?cat=Lin260 [distribute...width.info].

      It's got the patch & the full kernel.

  • Hot damn (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Limburgher ( 523006 ) on Saturday October 25, 2003 @09:42PM (#7311677) Homepage Journal
    I can't wait. I just hope RedHat 10 includes a 2.6 kernel, so I don't have to bother compiling it myself. I'd love to take advantage of the performance improvements, and I'd also like to use SATA drives in my new server.

    • Re:Hot damn (Score:3, Informative)

      by Squeebee ( 719115 )
      RedHat 10 (aka Fedora Linux, has a 2.6 kernel on their roadmap. Essentially they say that if 2.6 is officially released before they officially release RH10, and the switch will not cause delays, then they will ship 10 with 2.6, otherwise they will ship an updated version ASAP after the release of 2.6.
      • Is it posible to switch kernels just recompiling? Aren't dependencies between the rest of the system programs? Can I put a 2.6 kernel in a 2.4 distro?

        • Re:Hot damn (Score:3, Informative)

          by gweihir ( 88907 )
          Can I put a 2.6 kernel in a 2.4 distro?

          Should not be a problem. I have a debian/testing installation with a self-compiled stock 2.6.0-test1 from www.kernel.org. It has been running crash free since end of July now.

          For a complete list of minimal requirements, look into the Documentation/Changes file in the kernel sources. At least 2.6.0-test1 has no extreme requirements, as far as I can tell.

        • you need a new version of modutils
          that's all, AFAIK
          also Gentoo bitches if you don't have devfs enabled, and it's OBSOLETE in 2.5+
          • it's not necessarily obsolete, it's just been decided that it needs to be reworked as more of a userspace utility rather than kernel space for it to be effective. it's like rewriting a part of the kernel to add more efficient things to it, but never providing any way to take advantage of it. I know, I know, you'll mention devfsd, but all that does is handly making the device nodes that devfs tells it to make, it doesn't really do any device discovery.

            P

            ps, that may or may not be 100% accurate. I read LK
        • Recompile any third party modules such as dri drivers. If you got binary ones, I think you'll need to find some 2.6.0-ready ones.

      • Re:Hot damn (Score:5, Informative)

        by yorgasor ( 109984 ) <ron@@@tritechs...net> on Saturday October 25, 2003 @11:35PM (#7312028) Homepage
        Um, I think you misread that. The Fedora Core 1 that is coming out in a couple weeks has no plans whatsoever for supporting kernel 2.6. The following Fedora Core (what you would call RH11) will come with kernel 2.6 if it's ready. If it seem stable enough, they'll hurry up and get the new release out there, but if not, they won't delay the release just to get the new kernel in.

        No matter what, they won't be shipping a kernel unless they've been able to test it thoroughly. And it'll probably take several kernel releases before it's ready to be shipped with a distro.
        • So then what you're saying is that Red Hat has become a marketing organization rather than an OS distribution company? I mean, really, what did we really get since RH7.x that is truly significant? A few kernel patches? I've got up2date or yum to deal with that. An updated GUI? Bah.

          Red Hat needs to get back to the open source basics of realizing that there's little to be gained from releasing early, and much to be gained by releasing when there's significant updates. They could easily have waited foll

          • They could easily have waited following the initial RH8 release until now to release RH8-Final, and then give kernel geeks the chance to pore through the 2.6 kernel before releasing RH-Fedora1 with 2.6 support, not without.

            And if you'll notice, with their enterprise server version (which is their real moneymaker and the distro they spend most of their effort putting innovations into), they are pretty much doing exactly that. The "personal" Red Hat release is pretty much just a service they offer to the u

        • Re:Hot damn (Score:2, Informative)

          by minion ( 162631 )
          Um, I think you misread that. The Fedora Core 1 that is coming out in a couple weeks has no plans whatsoever for supporting kernel 2.6.

          Which is a good reason to try Slackware [slackware.com] again. 9.1 was just released, with 2.4.22, and support for 2.6. Which means they already did the dirty work of making sure mod-init-tools was on the machine, along with other necessities. Not to mention it comes with Gnome 2.4 and KDE 3.1.4

          I've tried 2.6.0-test4 on Slackware 9, and it made a difference in desktop usability and res

    • Re:Hot damn (Score:1, Interesting)

      by mslinux ( 570958 )
      I can't wait. I just hope RedHat 10 includes a 2.6 kernel..."

      There isn't going to be a RedHat 10. RH decided to fuck all of their loyal follwers and concentrate on their "corporate" customers. Go to redhat.com and read about Fedora. I miss Alan Cox, will he go back to work for the RH bastards after he finishes his Masters?
      • I'm not sure I understand the FAQ. I can understand why they made this move ($$$), but what impact will it have on me as a RedHat-on-the-Desktop user who doesn't want to dish out $179 bones for the RHEL WS edition? Is Fedora still going to be fairly fresh, or will it turn into Debian?

        *sigh*, Now I get to tell people I'm running "Fedora" Linux. Might be a good time to check out SuSe again.

        (please excuse my ignorance on this matter)

        • Re:Hot damn (Score:3, Informative)

          by Darmox ( 16016 ) *
          Just to clear up a little thing about Debian, yea, stable is some pretty old packages/versions, but it is very well tested, and rock solid.

          Debian unstable, however, is fairly close to bleeding edge... I mean, Mozilla 1.5 hit a day or two after it was released, Gnome 2.4 took oh, probably a few weeks... And really, the packages are quite stable, sometimes the upgrading/installing of them isn't, however. (but that's what happens when you're using bleeding edge stuff)

          And, if you don't want to deal with uni

          • Re:Hot damn (Score:3, Informative)

            by golgotha007 ( 62687 )
            Just to clear up a little thing about Debian, yea, stable is some pretty old packages/versions, but it is very well tested, and rock solid.

            i keep hearing this about Debian, and indeed it's true. however, i run redhat 9 on all my production servers using the latest packages from the apt-get repository from freshrpms. i have zero stability problems and my servers run rock solid as well.

            even though i run redhat systems, i still use vi for every configuration; that's one of the things i like about redhat
            • You're missing what they mean by "stable"
              They don't necessarily mean software not crashing stable (though that's part of it)

              They mean the API's for programs will stay the same, the expected behaviour of a program will stay the same.

              The only time anything like that gets modified is for security fixes. But it's why they backport the fixes, so that program behaviour is the same as it's always been.

      • RH [RedHat] decided to fuck all of their loyal follwers and concentrate on their "corporate" customers.

        I don't understand your anger here--RedHat

        • is apparently contributing to the Fedora project (bandwidth, hosting, and software Fedora is building on, to name three things); it looks like Fedora and RH are working together to bring us the next revision of what used to be RedHat's GNU/Linux distribution.
        • will still be subject to the terms of the GNU General Public License. Their changes stand to benefi
    • I just hope RedHat 10 includes a 2.6 kernel, so I don't have to bother compiling it myself.

      man, i thought the very same thing for the last month or two. but the other day, i downloaded test8 and i've been a happy camper ever since.

      actually, compiling the 2.6 kernel is a lot easier than the 2.4 one. there's less commands to deal with and there doesn't seem to be any compile breakage.

      for redhat users, check out this page [fearthecow.net] and this page. [thomer.com]

    • RedHat 2.6 Kernels (Score:2, Informative)

      by Oronwe ( 686723 )
      Take a look at http://people.redhat.com/~arjanv/2.5/ they have unofficial, precompiled 2.6 kernels there, last one is test8. Kernel is working just fine on my T23, minor bootup issues with USB, otherwise no problems. Only other thing is, you have to update your modutils and initscripts.
  • Now all I need is a distro with the 2.6 kernel and I can actually get Linux up and running again. It hasn't been the same since I got that SATA drive.
  • Just compiled and booted test8 on the laptop...
    • pimpbot:~/mrtg# uname -a
      Linux pimpbot 2.6.0-test8 #5 Fri Oct 24 15:45:49 EDT 2003 i686 GNU/Linux

      me too dude... me too.. :( I'll probably wait till test10 or final as this one is working flawless for me right now so far.

      The one thing that's annoyed me so far is the lack of documentation on how the new sensors interface works, and the fact that no programs seem to support it yet. Apparently you don't need lm sensors anymore, but that little tidbit is hidden away well within a vague statement on their webs
      • 2 bad I suck:

        #!/usr/local/bin/php -q
        <?
        $TEMP1=file_get_contents('/sys/devices/leg acy/i2c- 0/0-6000/temp_input1');
        $TEMP2=file_get_contents( '/sys/devices/legacy/i2c- 0/0-6000/temp_input2');

        printf("%.1f\n", $TEMP1/1000);
        printf("%.1f\n", $TEMP2/1000);
        echo ltrim(`uptime`);
        echo ltrim(`hostname --long`);
        ?>
      • gkrellm works with the new sensors. Actually I couldn't get lmsensors working at all, but now the hardest part was just figuring out which modules I needed to load for my motherboard, then load them, and it just worked.

  • Taunting the LG users? (Score:5, Funny)

    by wrinkledshirt ( 228541 ) on Saturday October 25, 2003 @09:46PM (#7311696) Homepage
    I see one of the icons for this story is a compact disc. That's just plain mean.

  • Still a bit to do. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Neon Spiral Injector ( 21234 ) * on Saturday October 25, 2003 @09:48PM (#7311708)
    It doesn't build for the x86-64 platform, and doesn't boot on "white box" Alphas (ones only intended to run NT). So my 64-bit machines are feeling a bit left out.

    At least patches for both problems are available, but need to be merged.

    • Re:Still a bit to do. (Score:4, Informative)

      by phantomlord ( 38815 ) on Saturday October 25, 2003 @10:07PM (#7311795) Journal
      wait for 2.6.1... Linus has repeatedly stated that all he cares about being buildable and stable for 2.6.0 is x86. He's been pretty irked by the people maintaining trees for other architectures which have gone ages without merging suddenly wanting to get the patches in at the last minute, especially if it means changing more than just the arch specific files.
    • White box Alphas? You mean like the Deskstation machines, or something else? Gosh. I'd love to have Linux on this old Deskstation Raptor that I've got access to. Doesn't look like it will happen.
      • Actually I mean the pedestal sized machines. There are blue and white box varients. The blue box could run NT, VMS, and Digital Unix, but the white box versions of the same machine were only licensed to run NT. The internal system ID was just set to negitive of the blue box version. The patch I'm speaking of, detects the negitive ID and inverts it.

        Have you tried getting Linux to install on it? I'd have a look at the Redhat Fedora Linux port to the Alpha. It may not be that far along now, but 2.6 did a

  • Still the same error, propagated from kernel 2.2 (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 25, 2003 @09:49PM (#7311711)
    I submitted several bugs to the bug tracker, I e-mailed Alan Cox and Lunis Torvalds, and I still get the same error when trying to run it:

    kernel-2.6.0-test9.tar.bz2 is not a valid Win32 application

    and then the error message with Ok and Cancel.

    Anyone has any howto on whether this bug will ever be fixed? Or is there a service pack or a patch I missed?

  • Hooray (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Can't wait to install this one on my new LG computer!
  • Sorry about this- somewhat new to Linux scene. Dispite these minor changes in test9, what overall in 2.6 is going to be different? Any good reason to upgrade?

    • Re:So what's the difference? (Score:5, Informative)

      by gid ( 5195 ) on Saturday October 25, 2003 @10:29PM (#7311902) Homepage
      Alsa sound drivers are built right in. So now I don't need to copile them separately. The oss support for my sound card was very half ass, it didn't even support full duplex and hardware mixing.

      Also, i2c and the lm sensors interface is built right in as well. So now I don't have to compile i2c and lm sensors to know how hot my mobo and cpu are running. They have saved my computer at least once. My cpu fan died on me, I wouldn't have known if I didn't have it graphed.

      Also there's pre-emptible kernel option. It makes X more responsive, especially noticeable under heavy load and on slower computers. Supposedly better memory management as well, but as I have 768 megs of ram, I probably won't ever notice that.

      There's also USB 2.0 support, and support for USB type removeable drivers. I think both of those are new.

      There's probalby more, but those are the ones I know off hand.
      • USB 2.0 support actually exists in 2.4 as well. Noteable improvements to 2.6 include a new scheduler, additional filesystems, pre-emptiblity and ACPI. (Its faster for sure).

        Then again, I run Con Kolva's patch set in 2.4 so I have a pre-emptible kernel and the new scheduler and some other random goodies. Its not quite as fast as 2.6 but as I can't keep up with that development cycle it suits me.

    • If you're 'somewhat new' to Linux, then you should probably ignore it. Upgrading your kernel to a release candidate ("test") version isn't recommended unless you know what you're doing and you want to help test it.

      Just wait for your distro to pick it up in a few months, after the testing is done.

    • One big improvement in 2.6 will be with handling of CD and CD-RW drives. CD audio extraction will be able to use DMA, which should speed it up a lot. Also, CD writing will be possible using the regular IDE driver, so it won't be necessary to use SCSI emulation anymore.

      For a really comprehensive description of the changes with 2.6, you might want to look at The Wonderful World of Linux 2.6 [kniggit.net], which goes into much more detail than anyone on /. is likely to be able to.

  • I decided to test out 2.6 test7 when it was announced awhile back on /. I was tempted by all the comments about increased desktop responsiveness. Well, it's true and it IS noticeable. Coupled with the fact that there is a patch for the nvidia drivers and I'm one happy camper. :)

  • try this ftp (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 25, 2003 @10:07PM (#7311794)
    if you have problem downloading, try this one.

    ftp.sco.com/pub/linux/source/beta/kernel/hey_bil ly-/we_need_to_check_da_code/need_cash/buy_mo_shar e/2.6.0-test9.src.rpm

    Good luck everyone!!

  • For a kernel compilation newbie... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mnemonic_ ( 164550 ) <jamec@u m i ch.edu> on Saturday October 25, 2003 @10:11PM (#7311811) Homepage Journal
    For someone like me who has never compiled a kernel before, what sort of troubles should I expect in a move to a new kernel version?
    • As a fairly new GNU/Linux user myself, I've found compiling and running new kernels to be quite easy. I should mention, though, that my early efforts failed completely. This was when I was running Red Hat 9. I guess RH needs something special; at any rate I never got 2.6.0-testX to run on it. I am now using Gentoo, and everything seems to be working extremely well, and I'm currently running test8-mm1. I recommend you read this tutorial written for the 2.6 kernel: http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/799. Good l
      • You both probably know this, but unless you have a specific need to run 2.6, or you want to get involved in reporting bugs and such (or you just feel a compelling need to live on the edge), it's probably best to stay with 2.4 for now.
        • Since my computer is not a critical, data-filled, work-type computer, running (potentially) unstable kernels is not a problem for me. But the test series is quite stable, and I've had no problems with it. Not to mention that there are quite a lot of new features in it that I simply couldn't wait for months to get!

    • Re:For a kernel compilation newbie... (Score:5, Informative)

      by digitalhermit ( 113459 ) on Saturday October 25, 2003 @10:43PM (#7311966) Homepage
      Things to watch:
      Build your root fs models statically into the kernel.

      Your /etc/modules.conf file will likely need to be updated because of differences in the module names.

      Some init scripts will need to be modified.

      None of these are fatal errors but will cause some failure messages as the system comes up. This can be a little disconcerting but shouldn't do any harm.

      If you're running things like NVidia binary drives, VMWare, or any applications that build kernel modules specific to the running kernel you will need to rebuild those hooks.

      Some USB devices may magically start working!

      Your /dev layout may look different, possibly breaking some scripts.

      Some parts of /proc may not be the same, so things that rely on cat'ing files in /proc might break. For these use applications like lspci instead of reading proc directly.

    • then you probably ought to become familiar with compiling a kernel from the same kernel series as the one you're running before doing a 2.6 kernel. Many drivers in 2.6 haven't been changed to the new driver specs yet, and 2.6 needs new userspace utils (module tools are the most crucial) to work. When you decide to compile a 2.6 kernel, read Dave Jones' What to expect from 2.6 [kernel.org] which hasn't been updated in a couple months but is still very much a must-read.
    • Remember, "make oldconfig" is your friend. It may be in /boot, on the install cd, or actually in the source tree at /usr/src/linux/.config
    • Read this article [kerneltrap.org] at KernelTrap [kerneltrap.org]. You'll probably need new modutils and may need new fs utilties. If you've never run ALSA before, there's a lib and some more utils.
  • Why does Linux dev-community reluctantly ignore Commodore 64s???

  • Running 2.6-test9 now (Score:3, Informative)

    by Azar ( 56604 ) on Saturday October 25, 2003 @10:27PM (#7311898) Homepage
    I downloaded and was compiling the sources when the story broke on Slashdot.

    When Pat said that Slackware 9.1 was 2.6 ready, he wasn't kidding. So far, so good. Not a glitch during the compile or boot-up. I plan to stress test it as much as possible to see if I can tell the difference between 2.4.22.

    I can't wait until Linux 2.6 final is out.
  • Looking at the note from Linus, it looks like a lot of things that will eventually be pushed into the 2.6.x series are going to have to wait for post-2.6.0. I was sort of intending to wait to upgrade until 2.6.2 or 3 -- however, if there's going to be a flurry of additions in the early 2.6.x kernels, I'm thinking that 2.6.0 might be more stable, in which case I might use it instead. (I don't intend to wait too long before upgrading ... I don't have that much self-control.)

    Does anyone else think this will
    • If 2.4.x is any indication, you're not safe until 2.6.13 at least.

      Or aren't we supposed to talk about that ;)

      • If 2.4.x is any indication, you're not safe until 2.6.13 at least.

        That's almost true (wasn't 2.4.14 broken too?), but personally, I've had as few problems with 2.6.0-test* as I've had with late 2.4-kernels (with the exception of ACPI, which needs 'pci=noacpi' at the bootprompt, or the computer won't boot at all (a fairly major problem, I must admit, but not after I learned how to solve it)).

        The correct answer to the question is: test it now, and see how it works. If it's broken, submit bug reports. If i

        • Your mileage will indeed vary considerably depending on your hardware.
          I have made a specific point of buying well supported hardware where possible, so things like my network and scsi cards work with almost any kernel version (and both have vendor supported drivers in 2.4 and above - adaptec's aic7xxx driver and intel's e100 driver). If you are running strange newfangled onboard chipsets for things you might find it won't even boot ;)
          I've been running test8 for a couple of days now and it has been pretty m
          • For me, the 2.6.0-test*-mm* series has been a marked improvement to 2.4.*-ck* (which has some of the scheduler improvements backported), especially under load. A couple of hours ago, Gaim hung and used 100% CPU. I didn't notice at all. The system starts to feel sluggish when the load reaches 1.80 or there about, with heavy disc activity.

            Oh, and burning CDs is so much better now that I don't have to use ide-scsi. Faster, and I don't even have kernel panics! (My system has always been horrible with CD burnin
  • Now, if only the nVidia drivers hacks out there worked for me (perhaps I am horribly inept!) so that I could upgrade my desktop and still use my nifty graphics card! Or Maybe nVidia will get support for the 2.6 kernel included in the Linux drivers!! (Not holding my breath)

  • ACPI and USB (Score:3, Informative)

    by PeterClark ( 324270 ) on Saturday October 25, 2003 @11:39PM (#7312048) Journal
    Does anyone know if the conflicts between ACPI and USB have been fixed yet? Basically, if ACPI is enabled in the kernel, it will mess with USB--for instance, my USB mouse will suddenly stop working (no errors in /var/log/messages or syslog) and won't work again until I 'rmmod ohci_hcd' and modprobe it back again. My laptop (which is currently running -test8) has this problem, and it is very annoying (although at least APM works).

  • I hope... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by AltGrendel ( 175092 ) <`su.0tixe' `ta' `todhsals-ga'> on Saturday October 25, 2003 @11:40PM (#7312049) Homepage
    ...that 2.6 will be released before RedHat finally drops support for all the pre-9 releases

    Yes, I realize that I can roll my own kernel, I've done it many times. It's just that they work better when RH makes the RPM. Not that this is as it should be.

  • Andrew Morton at Southern California Linux Expo (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MrMorph ( 614137 ) on Sunday October 26, 2003 @12:58AM (#7312360)
    Andrew Morton [socallinuxexpo.org] the heralded maintainer of Linux kernel 2.6 will be speaking at the Southern California Linux Expo [socallinuxexpo.org] on November 22nd at the Los Angeles Convention Center in Los Angeles, California. Andrew will be speaking on the Linux pagecache, VFS, filesystem and VM nexus. Regular priced and student priced tickets giving full access to the event are still available for this event. Free expo only tickets are also available using the "FREE" promotional code on the orders [socallinuxexpo.org] page. The Southern California Linux Expo is a non-profit event organized by LUG volunteers.

  • SCO code (Score:2, Interesting)

    by tuggy ( 694581 )
    anyone knows if the supposed stollen code from $CO has been removed? :>

  • Performance (Score:3, Informative)

    by pasi ( 518572 ) on Sunday October 26, 2003 @06:36AM (#7313070) Homepage
    Ok, before you read any further remember that this is NOT accurate, tested or anyhow valid information. Some of this is purely psychological and has got NOTHING to do with real benchmarks.

    I've been running 2.4 series with CK [1] patches. I'm unfortunately using somewhat low-end hardware (P200MHz) and hence I really appreciate performance. I switched to linux-2.6.0-test8 only a week ago, so again this isn't really the best source of information.

    Anyhow, I'm so far REALLY happy with performance of 2.6.0-test8. Before the switch, I was using 2.4.22-ck1 which was a lot worse performance-wise than my previous kernel, .20-ck6. Didn't switch back just yet because I had compiled in some stuff I needed and it takes a while to compile a new kernel with this hardware.

    Linux-2.6.0-test8 has done A LOT better than .22-ck1, and it has seemed even more responsive in normal use (IRC, web surfing, MP3s etc) than .20-ck6 which I was already happy with. Responsiveness shows in switching desktops when browser is doing things, starting things and playing MP3s at the same time.

    And yes, as I said in the beginning, most of this is purely psychological and inaccurate. Slower hardware of course benefits more even from smallest performance gains. Then again, I don't believe that 2.6 will be The Thing for serious production enviroments for a while, it's not mature enough yet. But for me -- for desktop use -- great!

    [1] http://members.optusnet.com.au/ckolivas/kernel/ (Con Kolivas' kernel patches that aim to a more responsive system)
  • Ive found a version of Windows [onzin.com] that is actually superior to Linux..

Slashdot Top Deals

Solutions are obvious if one only has the optical power to observe them over the horizon. -- K.A. Arsdall

Close