Kernel release status

[Posted March 2, 2011 by jake]

The current development kernel is 2.6.38-rc7, released on March 1. "There really isn't a lot to report here. Driver updates (random one-liners and some sound soc codec and smaller dri updates) and a few filesystem updates (in particular btrfs fiemap and ENOSPC handling), but most of it really is pretty tiny. Regressions fixed, hopefully none introduced." Full details can be found in the long-format changelog.

Stable updates: The 2.6.37.2 stable kernel was released on February 24. The 2.6.32.30 longterm kernel was released on March 2, with a note of appreciation: "Many thanks again to Maximilian Attems who dug around in a lot of different distro kernels and forwarded to me the original git commit ids that should be applied to this tree. Red Hat didn't make this very easy due to their "one giant patch" format, and his skill is helping everyone out here."

to post comments

Kernel release status

Posted Mar 4, 2011 3:00 UTC (Fri) by nlucas (subscriber, #33793) [Link] (6 responses)

What's up with 2.6.35 updates? Wasn't supposed to be one of the long term versions?

It's possible none of the other bugs affect 2.6.35, but I find that very hard to believe.

Kernel release status

Posted Mar 5, 2011 15:34 UTC (Sat) by BenHutchings (subscriber, #37955) [Link] (5 responses)

Greg doesn't handle 2.6.35; that was taken on by Andi Kleen.

Kernel release status

Posted Mar 5, 2011 16:20 UTC (Sat) by nlucas (subscriber, #33793) [Link] (4 responses)

I am aware of that. I didn't ask anything about Greg (or anyone).

What I'm asking is why there are no 2.6.35 updates yet.

Kernel release status

Posted Mar 5, 2011 16:55 UTC (Sat) by BenHutchings (subscriber, #37955) [Link] (3 responses)

Because Andi is not obligated to follow the same schedule as Greg, of course.

Kernel release status

Posted Mar 5, 2011 17:29 UTC (Sat) by nlucas (subscriber, #33793) [Link] (2 responses)

Sure, but for every day that passes increases the probability of one or more 0-day exploits for 2.6.35 users.

If they can't sync the releases then maybe there should not be a 2.6.35 long term version until there is someone who can.

Notice that I'm not trying to spread a bad image on Andy or anyone, I'm sure there should be some fair reason for the delay - just stating the facts.

Kernel release status

Posted Mar 6, 2011 1:32 UTC (Sun) by giraffedata (guest, #1954) [Link] (1 responses)

for every day that passes increases the probability of one or more 0-day exploits for 2.6.35 users.

That should just be "probability of one or more exploits."

By definition, there's zero probability of 0-day exploit as these days pass. A 0-day exploit happens before people know the code is broken.

Kernel release status

Posted Mar 6, 2011 3:44 UTC (Sun) by nlucas (subscriber, #33793) [Link]

Right. By definition it was the wrong word.

But if you extend the definition a bit to include exploits for unfixed vulnerabilities (what I actually intended to say), my point still stands.