| |||||||||||||
The 2.6.10 kernel is out
Linus announced the availability of 2.6.10
just before taking off for the holidays. There are CIFS and DVB updates
since -rc3, along with the usual pile of fixes. For those of you just
tuning in, 2.6.10 as a whole includes a new kernel events notification
mechanism, switchable I/O schedulers (and a new CFQ scheduler as well),
in-kernel cryptographic key management, DVD+RW and CDRW packet writing
support, ext3 block reservation and online resizing support, big updates
for many kernel subsystems, and a handful of security fixes. The long-format
changelog (1.5MB) has all the details.
(Log in to post comments)
Packet writing! :D Posted Dec 27, 2004 16:45 UTC (Mon) by bdw (guest, #16047) [Link] Finally! This is a feature that I felt was badly needed. The UFS file system has been around for quite a while now but not packet writing.
I remember there was an attempt at packet writing with the 2.2.x/2.4.x kernels, but it was IDE only.
Backups are going to be easier now, hopefully.
packet writing filesystem Posted Dec 27, 2004 17:13 UTC (Mon) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link] I think you're thinking of the UDF filesystem, not UFS. UFS is thestandard disk filesystem on BSD. UDF is the filesystem used with packet writing.
The 2.6.10 kernel is out Posted Dec 27, 2004 20:21 UTC (Mon) by TwoTimeGrime (guest, #11688) [Link] Would someone be kind enough to explain the new development model for the kernel for me, or provide a link to an explanation? As I understand it now the kernel is still being actively developed in the 2.6 branch and 2.7 hasn't been spun off. I've read about all of the new performance enhancements in 2.6 but I hesitate to upgrade to something that's still seeing a lot of development changes. Are my fears unfounded?
The 2.6.10 kernel is out Posted Dec 27, 2004 20:34 UTC (Mon) by error27 (subscriber, #8346) [Link] On enterprise systems it's been advised to stick with distro kernels for a while now. Even on home systems upgrading to a 2.6 kernel from a 2.4 kernel can be quite a pain.
That said, the 2.6 kernel is way less scary than the 2.5 kernel was sometimes. I stopped tracking the 2.5 kernel for a while because it didn't support my hardware. The 2.6 kernels are not going to stop supporting common hardware etc...
The 2.6.10 kernel is out Posted Dec 27, 2004 20:40 UTC (Mon) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link] for that matter the 2.6 kernel is a lot less scary then the 2.4 kernel was for much of it's life.
I'm useing the 2.6 kernel in production on quite a few systems (up over 100 at last count) and am seeing significant performance gains from making the switch.
there are a few things you need to take care of when making the switch, but there are how-to guides for all distros at this point (for most of them it's just a case of compiling and installing the new kernel, but some do require some tool updates)
The 2.6.10 kernel is out Posted Dec 27, 2004 22:02 UTC (Mon) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link] Most of the pain of switching from 2.4 to 2.6 is the same as the pain of changing major versions in general. Switching from 2.6.0 to 2.6.8.1 was completely trivial (to the point of having to check uname to make sure I'd actually booted the right kernel); 2.6.10 shouldn't be any different. I think the end-user benefit of the new model is that you won't have to switch painfully to 2.8 (or 3.0) in a couple of years.
Ironically, 2.5 didn't lead to 3.0 for lack of a sufficiently major feature to justify it; the new development model is, in my opinion, certainly significant enough, but it simultaneously means that it will stay 2.6 for a while. Of course, the change wasn't made until long after the series was named. I think that a 3.0 following directly from 2.6 to acknowledge the difference between the past and the present model would be worthwhile, perhaps when some other major progress has been made, like the final removal of the BKL and cli/sei. At this point, a major modification to the internal behavior of the kernel will have been completed without ever destabilizing the mainline releases, thus validating the new model.
The 2.6.10 kernel is out Posted Dec 27, 2004 20:36 UTC (Mon) by jvotaw (subscriber, #3678) [Link] I can't comment on the development model, but the stability has been good to me so far. I've run versions through 2.6.9 on a few production servers, and so far it seems a tad more stable than 2.4. YMMV, of course, depending on what features and hardware you use -- for example, there was an issue with Dell's PERC3 RAID controllers a while back (aacraid module) and I'm not sure if that's fixed. (FWIW, that card seems to have hardware/firmware bugs regardless of the kernel...)
I'd say 2.6 is ready for prime time, especially if you wait a few weeks after each release in case there is a brown paper sack problem. You might also want to NOT build a pre-emptible kernel. I've had a few crashes on a machine with that turned on and had heard that there were still a few subtle bugs. (Can anyone confirm or deny this authoritatively?)
-Joel
The 2.6.10 kernel is out Posted Dec 27, 2004 20:52 UTC (Mon) by allesfresser (subscriber, #216) [Link] I've been running preemptible kernels for several months now and have experienced nary a hiccup (on C3, P4 and Celeron boxes).
The 2.6.10 kernel is out Posted Dec 28, 2004 10:57 UTC (Tue) by NAR (subscriber, #1313) [Link] Consider yourself lucky - 2.6.[89] crashed all the time for me on a Duron machine.
The 2.6.10 kernel is out Posted Dec 27, 2004 20:36 UTC (Mon) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] "Would someone be kind enough to explain the new development model for the kernel for me, or provide a link to an explanation?" How about this LWN article from last July?
The 2.6.10 kernel is out Posted Dec 27, 2004 21:14 UTC (Mon) by TwoTimeGrime (guest, #11688) [Link] Thanks. This article is just what I was looking for.
The 2.6.10 kernel is out Posted Dec 28, 2004 7:22 UTC (Tue) by smamunr (guest, #26850) [Link] The issue of unstable kernel with each new release is real but you haveto take certain risk to get good enough system for the price you want to pay. you have to hire programmers who will keep track of trivial changes and will incorporate those trivial changes and security changes. Unfortunately there are certain type of bugs exists (may be a security threat) which need quite a good amount of change. There could be another option. That is hire some expart who will plan and design migration plan to new kernel. Then I will suggest you upgrade your system every six months otherwise take risk of becoming obsolete. Come'on it is free as in beer, why the developer will take the pain when you are not ready to consider it. Even proprietary systems are not painless. Check MS XP-SP2? How many ways it is disruptive. Life is like that!
The 2.6.10 kernel is out Posted Dec 29, 2004 8:19 UTC (Wed) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link] Don't forget - when did 2.5 spin off from 2.4? Was it 2.4.15 and 2.5.0 that were the same kernel? I think it was about then.
2.7 will probably appear as soon as some big feature comes along that cannot easily be integrated into 2.6 without causing major disruption. The thing is, that is getting less and less likely as the progress towards a far more modular kernel proceeds.
Cheers,
The 2.6.10 kernel is out Posted Dec 30, 2004 9:37 UTC (Thu) by fache (guest, #23795) [Link] Not again! I think Linux has been clear enough: just keep reading lwn and you'll know what the model is.
I am perfectly happy with an up-to-date 2.6 and would not want to have to wait two years for a 2.8 to get those really wanted new features.
If you don't like it, don't buy it! Stick to 2.4 or to a stable distro, and let us live in peace for Pete's sake.
Linux, Andrew and others, please keep the good work coming: we like it the way it is!
|
|||||||||||||