Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Open Source Operating Systems Upgrades Linux

Linux 3.10 Officially Released 157

hypnosec writes with word that "The Linux 3.10 kernel has been officially released on Sunday evening which makes the 3.10-rc7 the last release candidate of the latest kernel which yields the biggest changes in years. Linus Torvalds was thinking of releasing another rc but, went against the idea and went ahead with official Linux 3.10 commit as anticipated last week. Torvalds notes in the announcement that releases since Linux 3.9 haven't been prone to problems and 3.10 is no different."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux 3.10 Officially Released

Comments Filter:
  • Pass (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 30, 2013 @10:49PM (#44150545)

    I'll wait for 3.11

    • Re: Pass (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 30, 2013 @11:01PM (#44150597)

      Linux for Workgroups is the best version

      • And me without mod points
      • screw that, the 3.0 (Warp) is the shitz

        • I'm still running 2.0.36, you insensitive clod!
        • I really liked a lot about OS/2 Warp... IMHO it's one of the last desktop oriented OSes that would run well on a 50mhz 486 with 8mb of ram (8mb being quite a bit for the time, but still). At some point we really just passed into bloat world. Don't get me wrong, I love having a multi ghz 8-core cpu... but there's something to be said for an OS that could do as much as OS/2 did, as well as it did. Shame that IBM kept it as walled off as it has. Wish that they'd Open-Source what they could from it (Warp 3)
          • OS/2 is still around and the latest version of 2011 is for sale. Serenity Systems bought the rights to it, now calls it EcomStation 2 and continues development mainly intended as a point of sale system.


            • AT $150 for the home license, it's really not competitive to Windows or Linux imho. I was aware it was spun off, but didn't know what the sale price for a license was.
              • not competitive? it's essentially the same price as windows, and in my opinion a superior OS to windows. if one had OS/2 applications or the development tools that can emit OS/2 code (which incidentally I do) it's not unreasonable.

                though I'll be sticking with BSD and Linux myself, thanks.

                people pay $140 for their windows home premium plus more than that for office software...spending $500 on home computer software is not uncommon

                • For windows, you have *ALL* the software available that runs on it... one of the reasons it can command the price it does... Linux/BSD are free to download/use with a fair amount of software... Anything else commercial needs to have a serious niche (which OS/2 does for some applications), or be priced below windows or offer more, but that isn't really applicable to a home user at a price that is as much as Windows (more if your computer is pre-loaded with it).
      • Linux for Workgroups is the best version

        Does it come with LinSock support out of the box?

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      3.14 will be the 'geek' release the mainstream press will notice.

      Note to kernel team: so try not to screw that one up.

      • by Anonymous Coward
        Just watch them go 3.13 -> 4.0
      • It's not that it "crashed", it's just that we expect it to take an arbitrarily long period of time to start running again...

      • by Anonymous Coward

        They could always move up to 3.1415 if they screw up 3.14.

  • Nvidia drivers (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 30, 2013 @11:07PM (#44150613)

    Nvidia drivers should be available for the new stable beast by the end of next month. They will get around to it when they are darn good and ready. 3.10-rc1 broke the latest driver. They released a driver about two rc releases ago, but it was still borken. I actually think they released it so that they could say 'see, see, we released a driver just a few weeks ago, so you shouldn't see anything new from us for a while!' It was a fluke that my current hardware build included an nvidia video card (the radeon card I originally bought was borked from the computer store: it wouldn't display video), so I took it back and the only thing they had that was close was an nvidia. They have worked hard to lose me as a customer. I suspect next time they will be successful.

    • Re:Nvidia drivers (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TheGoodNamesWereGone ( 1844118 ) on Sunday June 30, 2013 @11:37PM (#44150757)
      I agree in that I wish Nvidia would go faster, but what will you do? Run Noveau? The fact remains they DO support Linux, and they do it a helluva lot better than AMD/ATI do.. Now, if you don't run 3-D games that tax the hardware you'll probably be fine. I'm not picking on you so much as expressing frustration at the people who complain about Nvidia. No, their support isn't perfect. Yes, they've stumbled. Yes, they pour most of their resources into the Windows driver because Windows, crappy as it is, has 90% of the market. Mod me down, bitch about what I'm saying, whatever. I run Linux myself with an aging GT240 card. I boot into Windows once a month on my main machine for Patch Tuesday. ATI is not a real viable option, and while Intel graphics is fairly well supported, their 'cards' are not really as powerful. Be patient. There'll be a new driver out soon.
      • Re:Nvidia drivers (Score:4, Insightful)

        by emblemparade ( 774653 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @02:26AM (#44151385)

        I'm with you in this sentiment generally, though I'm also away of Linus' "fu** you, NVIDIA" moment. Apparently, NVIDIA are annoying collaborators with devs, and not only for video drivers.. so let's not cut them too much slack.

        My pet peeve: people complain constantly that NVIDIA "refuses" to open source their drivers. But these people don't understand that it's not a matter of merely deciding to do so: the NVIDIA drivers contain a whole bunch of 3rd-party code that NVIDIA cannot legally open source. It would require either 1) a lot of legal agreements (and likely lots of royalty and lawyer fees) to make 3rd-party agreements, or 2) rewriting the 3rd-party code from scratch, without referring to the original code. Both of these tasks are monumental and very expensive (for task #2, they would have to hire new programmers that have not been "tainted" by having seen the original code).

        Specs can't be "just" released for similar reasons: like the code, they are encumbered by patents and copyrights.

        NVIDIA have expressed a general will to open source the driver, but it may take years to take it to the next step.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by a_n_d_e_r_s ( 136412 )

          Given that patents has already been sent to the patent office and are public accessable from there; patent are never a reason for not open up specs.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Bert64 ( 520050 )

          So what's to stop them opening up those bits that they do own, and then allowing the community to fill in the blanks?
          Considering people are willing to try writing a complete driver from scratch, replacing a few missing bits in an otherwise complete driver isn't much of a stretch.

          • Perhaps they can't open source the stuff they own because they're not exactly sure what they own?

            Think about a decade of legacy code which may not be completely documented of who each individual author is and what license each line is under. It could be a mess that they'd rather avoid by just helping the open source community write their own code from the ground up.

        • for task #2, they would have to hire new programmers that have not been "tainted" by having seen the original code

          Uhm, why?

          Specs can't be "just" released for similar reasons: like the code, they are encumbered by patents and copyrights

          That makes no sense. Patent encumbrance can't possibly matter for releasability (is that a word?) of specs; patents are public by definition. And copyright is yours if you write the spec yourself.

        • by nazsco ( 695026 )

          They are dumb. Release the driver as opensource, and depends on the closed 3rd party code, shipped as the current binaryblob.

          Open source devs would waste their time implementing open source version of those components, freeing nvidia ofof paying royalties in the future.

      • I have the same video card (in my case, the 1GB gigabyte card, whose fan has failed and which I've replaced with cooler master) and the same logical basis for my decisions. Best video card value I've ever bought. It's slow now, but it worked when I bought it even though it wasn't officially supported since it's derived from another card and it's still working today, many moons later.

        The latest AAA games aren't on Linux, so unless you want to use it for GPGPU you just don't need the latest video card. You ca

    • Re:Nvidia drivers (Score:5, Insightful)

      by iggymanz ( 596061 ) on Sunday June 30, 2013 @11:49PM (#44150813)

      don't blame nvidia for not supporting the ever-mutable internal API of the Linux kernel. it's your fault for trying to run bleeding edge crap; stick with stable polished mainstream distros and you'll always have an nvidia driver

    • by smash ( 1351 )

      Given that 3.10 is not a release, getting new drivers for 3.10-rcX is better than you can expect with WINDOWS so I'm not sure what your bitch is. When I've upgraded Windows (RELEASE software) I've had driver issues for weeks or months while the vendors catch up. This has happened to me every single OS upgrade in Windows land, save for the jump from Windows 95 to Windows 98.

      Having a cry about Nvidia's shitty Linux support for this is a bit off the mark, IMHO. They don't even put drivers out for rc vers

  • How long before it shows up in major distributions such as Linux Mint?

    • by donaldm ( 919619 ) on Sunday June 30, 2013 @11:50PM (#44150821)

      How long before it shows up in major distributions such as Linux Mint?

      Don't know, but Fedora 18 has 3.9.6-200.fc18.x86_64 and that was a week ago. A quick check of the updates indicates that the 3.9.6 kernel is still the latest. As far as getting the 3.10 kernel goes I would say within a week or two, however it really depends on your distribution and how up to date the maintainers like to keep the repositories.

      If you are the repository maintainer for a customer that is using say Redhat Linux (you would be crazy to install a non supported Linux distribution on a production or even development machine) you may have a two to six month delay offset on updates and that is assuming that the customer or company allows 6 monthly updates. In my experience many companies don't like to do any updating once their systems are up and running and it is allot of work on the IT managers side to even get critical patches applied and without the appropriate sign-off's and agreed outages (normally 10 minutes) nothing gets done.

      • (you would be crazy to install a non supported Linux distribution on a ... development machine)

        No, I strongly disagree.

        You should be able to smash up your development machine with a hammer now, and be back up and running in a few hours. I've run all sorts of stuff as development machines, including distros far out of support for various reasons, and others like Arch which are totally bleeding edge.

        Also, hardware aside, I've never screwed up a developement machine so badly that I couldn't put off fiing it un

        • That includes accidently killing an ubuntu upgrade part way through.

          You've done that? Far out.

          I've never been able to stick with Ubuntu for more than an hour, much less upgrade it... :)

          • You've done that? Far out.

            It's kinda fixed, with judicious use of cargo-cult apt and dpkg incantations.

            I've never been able to stick with Ubuntu for more than an hour, much less upgrade it... :)

            Well it helps if you install FVWM and a few other nice tools :)

      • I'm not 100% certain what you're implying by "non-supported Linux distribution" but if you're referring to that little bullet point on your Dell PowerEdge spec sheet claiming to support "Red Hat" as being some sort of gospel and installing Debian (for example) is "crazy" I must conclude you've been drinking the marketing kool-aid.
    • Fedora makes available new kernels within a few days, for those that want to play with the latest and greatest. The 3.10 kernel should be available within the next 24 hours using the Fedora rawhide kernel nodebug repository [].

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 30, 2013 @11:27PM (#44150703)

    You are one of the greatest and most generous people on Earth. Thank you for all your work!

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 30, 2013 @11:42PM (#44150779)

    GNU Hurd is going to reach stable status very soon! At that point, Linux will be essentially obsolete.

  • Still no fix for khugepaged killing your system :(
  • The 3.9 releases haven't been prone to problems? Half of the 3.9 RCs panic'd my Phenom II X6 1045T system.

    I call shenanigans.

  • Kernel Newbies? (Score:5, Informative)

    by MMC Monster ( 602931 ) on Monday July 01, 2013 @09:21AM (#44152973)

    Do we not like Kernel Newbies anymore? I've always looked to them for a synopsis of kernel features: []

  • So here's a question: why aren't SBC manufacturers keeping up with kernel versions? Shipping product is often stuck somewhere in the middle of the 2.6 series.

    • by amannm ( 2964541 )
      Why would you ask SBC manufacturers? They are mostly dependent on the firms that design the involved ICs and their associated drivers, documentation, toolkits, etc.

If I had only known, I would have been a locksmith. -- Albert Einstein