Upgrading Your Current System To Kernel 2.6 442
An anonymous reader writes "This white paper provides an overview of the process of moving an existing desktop system to the 2.6 kernel. It will highlight other software requirements imposed by the new kernel and administrative changes that you must make when migrating an existing system to the 2.6 kernel. It supplements previous whitepapers in the same series about Customizing the 2.6 kernel [Slashdot discussion here(1)] and porting drivers to the 2.6 kernel [Slashdot discussion here(2)] to the 2.6 kernel."
I can't find it anywhere.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I can't find it anywhere.... (Score:2)
Re:I can't find it anywhere.... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I can't find it anywhere.... (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, I know what they're talking about, yeah, there's the penguin and the topic, but still.
Speaking of, can anyone help me upgrade from "Operating System 2000" to "Operating System XP?"
Re:I can't find it anywhere.... (Score:5, Insightful)
How about from "Operating System 9" to "Operating System X"?
It's not like there's no precedent for just calling an OS 'OS'...
I wish I had this two months ago (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:4, Informative)
I played around with it also and found it to cause many problems.
If you run Red Hat, check out this webcast 2.6 Linux Kernel in Red Hat Enterprise Linux v.3: A Technology Overview [redhat.com] about them backporting features to 2.4.
I run a great deal of IBM servers and I can see their ties with IBM. I hope this webcast will enlighten me to how they make sure that Red Hat gets the most of the IBM servers, since we have a company decision to run Red Hat.
That's almost the same as my hardware (Score:2)
What trouble did you have installing?
Upgrading within and between distros? (Score:2)
Since I'm still new to running *nix at home, I haven't ever had anything on my dedicated Linux box that I needed to save, so all of my installs have been on a freshly formatted drive.
I am curious about the "upgrade" process - what changes? What is lost? What is moved/renamed? I would expect that nothing in
[OT] Reinstall tip (Score:4, Informative)
As an aside, you can save yourself a lot of trouble in doing a fresh install with some intelligent partitioning. Most systems have an expert mode (or may offer nothing but expert mode, depending on the system) that lets you specify which partition corresponds to which mount point manually and decide which partitions should and should not be reformatted. If you set up /home on a separate partition, you can wipe everything else while leaving your user data alone. That can save you the trouble of having to restore all of your personal files when you install the new system. It's not necessarily perfect- some configuration files may change between versions of your favorite desktop environment, for instance- but it's a big improvement. You should obviously back up your data before doing the install just in case, but you should be doing periodic backups of your system already anyway.
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:5, Informative)
If you need a newer kernel, install a newer distribution.
Really? apt-get install kernel-image-2.6.3-1-686, followed by a reboot didn't seem too overly difficult for my little brother (very much a non-techie).
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:2, Insightful)
ObOldSaw (Score:5, Funny)
Sure it is. It's just picky about who its friends are.
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it's not the most Windows-like system around. It is the most Linux-like system around, and it's absolute craploads easier to use than Windows. Everything is documented, and everything is modifiable.
As a simple example: Windows XP doesn't handle wireless connections terribly well - if I standby my laptop with one wireless connection that uses DHCP, and then wake it up in an area where it has a different wireless connection, it doesn't release/renew the DHCP lease. I have to do it myself. This is stupid - on a Linux system, if the distribution was screwed up, I could just script it in a moment's notice.
Windows's help system is also a joke - most of the programs don't properly document what things do (the number of times I've seen "There is no help available for this option...") and so you're left hoping that things work.
Windows is by far one of the least user-friendly operating systems around. The problem is that it's so pervasive that everyone's used to believing that user-friendly = Windows-like = "everything just works". That's not true, because no operating system just works, because no operating system knows everything you could possibly do with it.
Linux forces you to learn about a problem before solving it. That actually makes it very user-friendly, because it means that users can realize that they can do more than what they originally thought they could do - meaning the OS makes them more productive.
Windows isn't user-friendly. The simplest way to illustrate that is to ask this: how much does it allow you, the user, to do, and how much does it try to do it for you? An operating system that does everything for you and allows you to do nothing isn't user-friendly, because what if you don't want to do what it wants? An operating system that allows you to do everything but does nothing for you isn't user-friendly, because, well, it's a computer. It can do things automatically. The best operating system is one that tries to do everything for you, but allows you to do everything as well, and that's Debian.
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:5, Insightful)
Uh, yes it is. That's why so many people I try to introduce Linux to don't want to switch. Linux is too much of a hassle to use.
Read the post again. I said
The problem is that it's so pervasive that everyone's used to believing that user-friendly = Windows-like = "everything just works"
and
No, it's not the most Windows-like system around.
People who start off using Windows learn its quirks and idiosyncracies and think of them as "normal". They're not. Linux isn't "Windows-ex-user-friendly", but I'm glad it's not, because Windows isn't userfriendly to begin with. In fact, there are quite a few different paradigms that Linux has that the Windows paradigm doesn't have that are far more user-friendly. See WindowMaker, for instance, with the NeXTSTEP interface, or Emacs with almost everything bound to keybindings, or LyX.
A high learning curve does not make something non-user-friendly, especially when there are rewards for the high learning curve. There's absolutely no doubt that there are more powerful tools under Linux - Emacs was virtually designed from the ground up to allow people to edit files as fast and as easily as possible (hence the reason that cursor editing keys are all control-combinations of home row keys). A person who chooses not to go through the "hassle" of not climbing a learning curve which has obvious benefits is not avoiding the program because it's not user-friendly - they're avoiding the program because they're lazy
Start off with people who have never used a computer (or at least, never used Windows), and are willing to learn to use one, and they'll learn Linux rather easily. That's how most of us did.
Only tech-nerds like us think that way. That's a made-up definition of user-friendly.
Am I a user? Yes. Is an operating system that doesn't let me do what I want non-friendly to me? Yes. Then it's not user-friendly, now is it?
Last time I checked the definition of user-friendly is "friendly to the user". If an operating system doesn't let the user do what he wants, it's not being friendly, now is it?
why she should change from something that "already works."
She already had a Windows mindset - that is, "Microsoft is smarter than you. You only want to do what Microsoft lets you do. You do not want to do anything else. Microsoft is good to you." She's not a user - she's a Windows user.
Windows doesn't "work". No operating system works. There's at least one thing broken about every operating system/distribution in existence. The question as to whether or not it's user friendly is whether or not you can deal with the broken parts well.
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:3, Insightful)
There's the problem. She's just looking for Windows, again. Same reason she went to Windows XP's classic look.
What does Linux have to offer? Try WindowMaker's desktop - it's remarkably more efficient to multitask with, and it's so light that having 5-6 virtual desktops is easy, and completely not straining on the computer at all.
Try LyX as a document editor. N
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:4, Insightful)
If you have software that's not open, and not free, fundamentally, it's not as user-friendly as software that is open source, because then, the user can change it, and the user is the only person who knows what his or her needs are.
It's the one limitation of OS X, but, honestly, Apple spends a crapload of time with usability focus groups, and most people's needs aren't *that* different, so it's not a serious limitation of OS X. Microsoft probably does the same, but my God, they must do a terrible job, because in terms of usability, their products are so far behind it's crazy. Don't like Messenger as an AIM client - and who would? - try disabling it in Windows XP. It takes serious effort to kill the damned thing, as a ton of other programs launch it as well. Want to run a script every time a connection is detected (like updating a dDNS connection, or setting up an open port on a wireless router)? Ha! Good luck. We all know these things are a joke to do inside the OS, but to normal people, these things just "aren't possible". Windows is worse than just "not user-friendly" - by being so pervasive it makes people think that it defines what a computer can do, and therefore, Windows' limitations become a computer's limitations.
Re:This man suffer, help him (Score:3, Insightful)
I hate to say it, but someone coming from Fedora is still not a user - they're a Red Hat user, and Red Hat has done quite a bit to make the system "like" Windows. If you expect Debian to act "like" Red Hat, you'll be disappointed. If you expect Debian to act "like" Windows, you'll be disappointed.
If you don't expect anything of Debian, and examine it for what it is, you'll be very impressed.
I don't want to describe all technical problems I had
No operating sys
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:3, Insightful)
You appear to equate "make everything possible" with "user-friendly".
Nope. User-friendly is "make easy things easy, but make everything possible." At least, that's my best interpretation of it. And while Windows does make easy things easy, it fails horribly at making everything possible. So much so that people will literally look at you like you're a computer god when you say "yah, I can get the file that's on your computer halfway across the country. No problem."
That's one positive of Windows. It mak
Re:OT: Debian (Score:3, Interesting)
Advice? The first install is the worst. :-)
After that, debian gets much better -- my laptop has gone through three major debian releases (potato, woody, and now sid) using nothing more that apt-get commands. [Actually, I guess I'm not really qualified to comment on the debian install process since I haven't really installed it in the last three years -- I just keep updating the existing install.]
At the time I did the initial install of potato, the installer dumped you into dselect, which is confusing if
Re:OT: Debian (Score:3, Funny)
Re:OT: Debian (Score:5, Informative)
Re:OT: Debian (Score:4, Informative)
Been there. Debian does install automatically on a FEW machines, particularly older machines that were popular and used "standard" components. I'm using a Dell GX1 that I got for $99.
Here s what I have done in the past when I got stuck without X-windows working...
Install Debian and go through the X-windows set-up process. Do the best you can at guessing your card information, refresh rates and whether or not to use framebuffers.
Locate the XF86Config(-4) file in
Now boot a copy of Knoppix (the bootable CD version of Linux), and, assuming it did a better job of setting up X-windows than you did, check the same settings for it (same location). Differences are likely to be in the horizontal and vertical refresh rates, the use of framebuffers, or the driver being used, also the list of module options such as "glx", "dri".
Surprisingly, X will fail to load properly even if your MOUSE settings are wrong. So you might have done everything right for video and gotten a trivial mouse parameter wrong and still have problems. (The systems DOES tell you this and tells you what log file to go read when this happens, but I remember being a bit intimidated by this process the first couple of times).
There are also some command line utilities you can run to straighten out your X setup, but I'm lazy and would rather just SEE that the system can work (using Knoppix, and then just copy what works.
Above process also works for diagnosing some network card and sound card problems.
Future versions of Debian will probably have better automatic device detection and configuration. In the mean time Knoppix (which is based on Debian) is a handy thing to have around.
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:2)
Kernel != distribution
How many revisions of RedHat were on 2.4?
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:4, Insightful)
The knowledge you yourself have was not channeled to your by some Atlantean spirit creature. You earned it the hard way.
The mere fact that this person tried to upgrade their kernel in the first place places them outside of the "normal" catagory to begin with. Hell, he might even be a wizard larva given a bit of time to grow and pupate.
If he wants to get his hands dirty and is willing to take the risks I'm on his side. Note that he didn't come on here saying "Linux sucks." He noted that he has had problems, but took proper precautions, he's been working them out and that maybe with the aid of this paper he'll give it another go.
That's hacker spirit.
KFG
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:5, Funny)
Tell me about it, the other day I just slapped the Win2k kernel into my win98 box and it just sailed right through, no problems at all...
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:2)
I can't speak for Mandrake or Slackware but SUSE has had update versions for ages.
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:2)
go to an ftp mirror of slackware-current, download packages you want, upgradepkg *.tgz.
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:2)
There is a severe price difference between Windows and desktop Linux distros... Therefore, there's no market demand for a "Mandrake upgrade edition"
I bought my first Mandrake distro as a closed box, because I wanted the manuals (and contribute with some money to their development), but all of my upgrades have been purchased here [cheapbytes.com]
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:2)
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:2, Insightful)
my 2c
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:2)
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:2)
That's the long term point... (Score:5, Insightful)
To that end, sometimes things will have to be broken to improve. The alternative is to support legacy code till the end of days and end up with MS-like bloatware.
Jo(e) average user doesn't want, need, or expect to upgrade their running kernel. So who cares how hard it is?
Justin.
Built my 2.6 kernel, won't run (kpanic), don't care, waiting for Red Hat or whoever to do it for me.
But on Slashdot (Score:4, Funny)
Here on Slashdot, the purpose is to beat Microsoft.
Give It Time. (Score:2, Funny)
Stories like this do nothing to help build a convincing argument to Stove users that Microwaves are in fact the better oven. If even seasoned Microwave users have problems popping popcorn, think of how frustrating it would be for someone less technically-inclined.
This is one of many issues that Microwave users have to work out before it can become a true mainstream oven.
Circa 2000...
Does anybody still use a stove to pop popcorn? Just asking.
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I wish I had this two months ago (Score:5, Insightful)
"Less technically inclined" has nothing to do with it. Computer skills are largely a matter of experience. I've used linux as my desktop for roughly 6 years. I can do most day to day system's administration things much faster than other people. Does this mean I'm more skilled? Probably not. I can also do most systems' administration tasks in Windows much faster than other people. Why? Because I've already addressed the issues or fixed the problems before. 2.6 is a new experience for most people and until they gain experience building it, its going to be hard. The same if you've never built a kernel before. So practice. And, uh, keep a boot disk around
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
What I'd like to see... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What I'd like to see... (Score:3, Insightful)
Forgive me, but I'm used to the highest numbered software to be the latest and best and when I go up to kernel.org, I see all these kernels being updated and maintained. Google'ing for the answer isn't helping.
Re:What I'd like to see... (Score:2)
Re:What I'd like to see... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What I'd like to see... (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes you are. This is supposed to be "...Stuff that matters." Well, I read /. daily, and Gentoo information matters to me.
The only thing I can figure is that Gentoo has become kind of the "macintosh" of the linux world. Everyone(tm) has just started saying "Yes, we realize you love Gentoo, but STOP TELLING US ABOUT IT." Which is fine, I suppose; zealots can be annoying. But just plain news, statements about Gentoo, shouldn't be modded down any more than news about any other distro.
That being said, I think most of the Gentoo Howto should apply to any version of Linux; they would just have to download the kernel sources themselves instead of using "emerge", and compile it themselves rather than using "genkernel". Still a fine piece of documentation.
My $.02, I'm done.
What system? (Score:2, Insightful)
So maybe we should point out that this is a whitepaper on upgrading Linux systems to kernel 2.6. (And no, I don't think the icon is enough - not everyone has a stuffed Tux on their desk).
Re:What system? (Score:3, Funny)
Or we could just use the grade school skill of reading in context.
Still conveniently igoring (Score:5, Informative)
Re:AMEN!! (Score:3, Informative)
Install device-mapper patch into 2.4 kernel. Devmapper isn't part of the 2.4, but is part of 2.6. Not sure if any distros include the patch in their 2.4 releases (Red Hat doesn't)
Install LVM2 into existing system (LVM1 and LVM2 commands can co-exist)
Boot 2.4 kernel w/device mapper and LVM2
*hand waving*
http://linux.msede.com/lvm_mlist/archive/2003/1 2
(AKA http://tinyurl.com/2jj3h [tinyurl.com])
Install 2.6 kernel w/device mapper and LVM2
In this case, y
This settles it. (Score:3, Funny)
sound (Score:5, Interesting)
Does anyone else have the same observation?
Re:sound (Score:2)
Re:sound (Score:2)
However, one thing I've been impressed with is that 2.6.3 now updates my laptop's front LCD clock display. Granted, Windows always did that, but Windows also had the manufacturers supporting it with drivers.
So at least I can see what time it is as I try to recompile hotplug.
Speaking of devices, when are we supposed to switch over fully to a udev system?
Re:sound (Score:3, Informative)
Re:sound (Score:5, Insightful)
I recently bought an SB-Live and decided to switch to ALSA. Debian made this as easy as choosing my soundcard from a list, and it automagically worked. I had the same experience at the office with my PC's onboard Intel 8x0 sound - no manual configuration was necessary.
Sound used to be a pain in the neck, but I pretty much consider it a solved problem now (except for maybe exotic boards). ALSA does an awesome job of getting it right with minimal user intervention.
Re:sound (Score:3, Funny)
It's worth it (Score:4, Informative)
Loads any modules you need
Lets you do tasks preemtpively
Boots in a much shorter time (from 2.4.23's 35 sec to ~14 sec in my case)
It's also rock solid in my experience now, a good sound kernel choice that will fit virtually all workstations =)
blah (Score:3, Informative)
Module loading (Score:2, Interesting)
Has anyone else had this problem? I've read that it may be a symptom of running a mixed stable/testing system, but I have yet to see a solution for the problem.
If you've got a... (Score:5, Informative)
I'm not the only one suffering this.
Works great on my slackware desktop.
Re:If you've got a... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:If you've got a... (Score:2)
Dinivin
Re:If you've got a... (Score:5, Informative)
Have you been bitten by the /dev/psaux change? (Excuse me if you know about this and you have a different problem).
Unless your kernel is compiled to specifically support the old /dev/psaux device, you'll need to change all references to it your X11 config file (stored in/etc/X11/) to its replacement: /dev/input/mice
Hope this helps.Re:If you've got a... (Score:4, Informative)
There's are problems upgrading? (Score:5, Insightful)
apt-get install kernel-image-2.6.2-1-686
update-grub
Two lines on the command line and a reboot and I've been happy ever since.
Oh, wait, we're talking outside Debian. Nevermind.
Re:Outside of Debian (Score:3, Informative)
You also have to manually upgrade all the packages to 2.6-supporting versions (by reading the README to find out what they are), and download and install the kernel source. Even if you wish to configure and compile the kernel yourself, Debian's package system will do this for you.
But the real issues involved in upgrading a kernel have nothing to do with how to install it. That is easy. LVM
Running smooth (Score:5, Interesting)
My NVidia drivers worked flawlessly with the new kernel, as well as my wireless network.
I get oooh's and ahhh's from the co-workers with 3DDesk, and my boss is impressed with my setup, even though he's got a shiny new G5 under his desk.
That's just my experience, though... YMMV
Fast mouse? Check your XF86Config (Score:5, Informative)
Probably everyone but me knew this, but thought I'd throw it out in case anyone else is in the same boat.
Re:Fast mouse? Check your XF86Config (Score:3, Informative)
psmouse_noext=1
My experiences with 2.6 (Score:5, Informative)
DVDs look awesome. I had to tweak the hdparms for DMA, but they work great.
Ever since NVidia came out with the latest drivers, things like the UT2k4 Demo fun fantastic.
I was a little hung up on modules... seeing as I rarely use them, it wasn't a show-stopper. The conversion from modutils to module-init-tools was mostly painless.
Recently, I've been playing with MTD, and trying to get a test machine to use 12 out of the 16 megs of an AGP Voodoo3 3000 card's memory as a device I can format or use as swap. I have been unsuccessful. (2.6.3). This is also on a testing machine, not my "main" machine.
On a slightly OT note, planning on building a Mini ITX system with a Via Epia board (one of the 800 mhz ones). Should have the case this week, jury's still out on the mb.
Other than that, no complaints, it's been fantastic. I'm running 2.6.3 on 3 different machines (with different responsibilies) and it feels like there's no going back now!
Re:My experiences with 2.6 (Score:2)
I have a question for seasonned linux users (Score:2)
Reiserfs issues (Score:3, Interesting)
So I tried Mandrake 10 RC1 (which uses 2.6.2 by default). It booted and runs wonderfully. However, yesterday I tried to upgrade the kernel to 2.6.3 from kernel.org. Using "make oldconfig" (and following the rest of the compiliation procedures) on my Mandrake-supplied
Note: Abit IC7-G motherobard (not sure if that makes a difference).
Re:Reiserfs issues (Score:2)
I run reiser on my laptop and before going XFS, ran it with 2.6 on my Abit KD7 which isn't a far cry from your IC.
What about grub? (Score:2)
Re:What about grub? (Score:3, Funny)
easier than 2.4 (Score:5, Informative)
Last week I took about 30 minutes and grabbed 2.6.3 did a clean/config/make, which took about the majority of that time, and booted into the fastest Linux box I have ever had.
2.6 booted with OpenGL without any tweaks pushing glgears to 1600fps and ALSA kicked in without errors on the emu10k1. Device drivers posed no issues for either the USB keyboard/mouse or hardrive or nework card.
No 'migration' was necessary for either windowmaker / enlightenment / blender / JACK or any of my other 100 some odd apps.
Debina and 2.6 Kernel module loading at boot (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Debina and 2.6 Kernel module loading at boot (Score:3, Informative)
My only real complaint. (Score:2)
My Firewire storage devices stopped working and my posts to LKM about it (once when 2.6.0 was released and one just yesterday concerning 2.6.3) have gone unanswered
Dinivin
Fedora Core 1 (Score:5, Informative)
And for the love of god, please read the whole thread. Don't ever install a kernel with rpm -Uvh. Leave yourself a backup (rpm -ivh).
Re:Fedora Core 1 (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How to upgrade 2.4 to 2.6 in Gentoo: (Score:4, Informative)
rm
ln -s
mount
genkernel all
vi
reboot
That is ALL there is to it. It is pretty much the same as upgrading to any other kernel. The only trick I saw was that the kernel needs more parameters than 2.4. It needs "root=/dev/ram0 init=/linuxrc real_root=/dev/hda?" appended, which kernel 2.4 did not need. All the other tools (module autoloaders, etc.) are already 2.6 ready on a Gentoo system
My weird problem with 2.6 (Score:5, Informative)
Upgrading to RedHat 7.1's kernel to 2.6 (Score:3, Informative)
Oh, and another problem I had was "Error: Unknown pseudo-op: `.incbin'" -- this was fixed by upgrading binutils to the latest version. Aside from these two problems, the upgrade went smoothly.
Crazy clock drift (Score:3, Interesting)
With 2.4 it was stable, but now under 2.6 some days it stays the same, other days it might move by 15+ minutes in a 24 hour period (I ntp it back of course)
And sound support for the nforce2 mobo is better.
Easy easy easy (Score:4, Interesting)
I must live a charmed life, think pure thoughts or something, because my 2.6 experience has been nothing but positive.
My first experience was with a Compaq laptop, Slackware 9.0 and 2.6.0-test4. I found that I broke the 2.4 modutils when I upgraded to module-init-tools, but since 2.6 worked so well, I really didn't care. Oh, and I've never had any trouble with that crazy mouse touchpad thingy.
Slackware 9.1 says it's 2.6-ready, and it is. I've installed it on a number of systems and upgraded the kernel easily.
My current challenge is my Sun Ultra 5, which currently runs Debian (woody) with the 2.4.18 kernel it came with. I ended up building 64 bit SPARC gcc and friends as cross compilers on an x86 box. But hello world still doesn't link... :-(
...laura
My experience (Score:5, Interesting)
First of all the menuconfig menus are a lot more well organised and there are a lot more options, too. Configured it up and it booted OK... I've upgraded to every version so far. The good things:
* Much less work required with "external" device drivers. With 2.4 I had to separately compile ACPI, ALSA, the nVidia driver, PCMCIA and Lucent modem drivers. Now it's just the Lucent and nVidia drivers as the other three are now included already.
* ACPI support is better. Won't bore you with the details, but it is
* Everything's faster, although I was using the new scheduler stuff as a patch to 2.4 so it didn't make too much difference.
* probably lots of little things I can't think of right now
The bad things - there seem to have been a few nasty bugs, but that's to be expected with such a big upgrade and most of them have been sorted. Currently ACPI battery support is doing funny things and occasionally reporting that the battery's empty, when it's not. Give it a couple of releases though and it should be all good
Good author (Score:3, Interesting)
I actually read his stuff, because it tends to make a lot of sense, and he has really good ideas.
I look forward to more articls from this author.
For ATAPI cd burners (Score:5, Informative)
The trick is:
cdrecord -scanbus dev=ATAPI
cdrecord dev=ATAPI:1,0,0 isname.iso
no boot time kernel options need to be passed (no more hdb=ide-scsi nonsense).
Good luck.
So far, a pain in the ass (Score:3, Interesting)
First problem, was getting the new module utilitys installed, I had to setup pinning. Not too hard, but was a pain to find some clear docs on this.
After that, I had many issues with getting iptables working. I can't find the damn thing in menuconfig, maybe I am blind, but I ended up just editing the
iptables still isn't fully working, I can't even connect to the internet using the machine it self. Why ? Becuase, bind9 is bitching about the kernel version. dhcpd isn't working either, due to kernel version.
When I migrated from 2.2 -> 2.4, there wasn't this many issues. I understand that the changes are needed, and things will clean up over time. I just wish there was better docs explaining WHAT has to be done.
Another intresting note, is that insmod doesn't work correctly, however modprobe does. Which, is very odd in it self.
I am too frustered after tooling around with it today, spent 2 hours on it. I will try it again next week.
I really want to upgrade to 2.6, since it better supports the opteron chips and better support (From what I have heard) on SATA / raid cards. (I have a 3ware SATA raid controller)
crossing my fingers for kexec() in 2.6 (Score:3, Informative)
The only complaint I can come up with (which isn't actually a complaint at all) is that 2.6 is still lacking kexec() [lwn.net] support. Randy Dunlap has been doing some work on it including patches [osdl.org] for 2.6.1 (works with
I've only rebooted my workstation 3 times since 2.6.2 came out, and 2 of those was a 'kexec -e' reboot. So I haven't had to wait on my annoying Video BIOS, Motherboard BIOS, or Adaptec BIOS in almost a month, which is nice.
Still, I can see why it is not included because it does break non-standard consoles (e.g. fbcon) on kexec reboot. Sure this is offtopic, but everyone else seems to be bitching about their beefs with 2.6 so I thought I would too
One of the more interesting problems... (Score:3, Interesting)
It basically runs Gentoo, in that I copied the boot CD, stripped out anything I didn't need, and manually installed things like ssh, apache, etc. The upside is that it's small. The downside is that it's a pain in the butt to upgrade.
The 2.6 install worked without too many initial problems, except the whole devfsd being required, and me not getting around to removing the requirement. That is, until I tried to reboot:
server root # shutdown -r now
Broadcast message from root (pts/0) (Wed Feb 25 11:24:11 2004):
The system is going down for reboot NOW!
RK_Init: idt=0xc05dc000, FUCK: Can't find sys_call_table[]
server root #
At this point, I'm blaiming the redhat compiler for stripping out something it shouldn't have. Though, anyone else have any suggestions?
Re:Yow. (Score:5, Interesting)
The days of "white paper" meaning a strictly technical or educational document are gone. These days, "white papers" are just another form of advertising.
Re:Yow. (Score:2)
Re:Jesus H. Christ moderators! (Score:3, Insightful)