Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Linux Kernel 2.5.19 Released 201

Posted by michael from the recompile-while-watching-the-world-cup dept.
The Pi-Guy writes "It's that time again, yep, another kernel update - 2.5.19 is out there, including lots of drivers ported to the new API, and lots of ia64 and PPC32 fixes! Grab it from your local Kernel.org mirror, or if you're feeling mean, you can grab it directly from kernel.org here. The changelog is also at kernel.org."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux Kernel 2.5.19 Released More

Linux Kernel 2.5.19 Released

Comments Filter:

  • Bluetooth in 2.6 will be something to wait for (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jukal ( 523582 ) on Sunday June 02, 2002 @04:26PM (#3627557) Journal
    As it now seems that bluetooth kernel support will make it to 2.6, we will see Linux crawling through new paths to embedded devices. The floodgates are now really open, since this has been a true barrier for many companies forcing them to select something else which is otherwise inferior.

    • Re:Bluetooth in 2.6 will be something to wait for (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      There is already bluetooth support in 2.4.18.
      • There is already bluetooth support in 2.4.18.
        This is slightly off-topic, but does anyone know how well the bluetooth support in 2.4.18 works? I'm looking at implementing an embedded device that needs bluetooth support, and would like to be able to use Linux.
      • Yes, but, it has not been utterly convincing before as it has had "experimental" status until the development version 2.5.14 which was released 05-May-2002. That's why I believe 2.6 will be what really makes the difference. Bluetooth has worked quite well for quite some time in Linux, but if you are making a decision for using that in a embedded device, you are likely to avoid anything "experimental" as the development project probably is an experiment already by itself :)

        <clip> in 2.5.14 [kernel.org] Bluetooth support (no longer experimental!) (Maxim Krasnyansky, Bluetooth team) <clip>

  • kbuild (Score:2, Interesting)

    by xer.xes ( 4181 )
    What happened to the new kbuild system? Last time I compiled 2.5, I included the new kbuild patch, and it worked great.

    Ah well.. It will probably end up like kgi.. Great project, but dies because some finnish guy doesn't want to include it into the kernel...

    • Re:kbuild (Score:5, Informative)

      by dozer ( 30790 ) on Sunday June 02, 2002 @05:49PM (#3627812)
      kbuild will probably go in, but it needs to be split up and added piecemeal... If Keith hasn't already burned out, it will take a few months. If Keith HAS burned out, and nobody steps in to take over, well, the current stuff still works fine. It's just not nearly as nice.

      KGI: what sort of example is this?? KGI was nowhere even near complete enough to be added to the kernel. These guys gave up before they were even half-way done. See the ruby project (the great console re-org) for kgi done right. Linus was correct to deny KGI.

      A better example would be CML2. It was pretty close to ready. ESR just needed to fix some bugs and make the interface closer to what we've been using for years. Did he? No, he spent all his time adding stuff like autoconfig that nobody would use anyway and flaming up a storm. He completely ignored the grievous xconfig bugs and performance issues. The design of his CML2 language was weird and needlessly complex. Using Python was motivated more by language advocacy rather than design decision. Linus was correct to deny him.

      Look at how long it took RL to get the preemtible kernel patch in, or Jaroslav to get ALSA in. Persistence pays off, stability reigns.

      If you want kbuild 2.5 now, it's easy to apply the patch...

      • A better example would be CML2. It was pretty close to ready. ESR just needed to fix some bugs and make the interface closer to what we've been using for years. Did he? No, he spent all his time adding stuff like autoconfig that nobody would use anyway and flaming up a storm. He completely ignored the grievous xconfig bugs and performance issues. The design of his CML2 language was weird and needlessly complex. Using Python was motivated more by language advocacy rather than design decision. Linus was correct to deny him.

        Does this mean we don't get the kernel configuration adventure game?
  • I mean, they're making it sound as if this is a stable release. Usually /. would preface development kernel releases with "Developer...".

    Oh, wait, I shouldn't expect consistency...this is Slashdot.

    • Probably. I thought it was a stable kernel release, until I began to read the comments. Most of us DO NOT care about the unstable kernel. I would only run an unstable if it had features I wanted. 2.4.18 is fine for me, thanks. Slashdot should have made it Developers, since thats all it really concerns. When, for example, Linux releases 2.4.19, make a news post. Until then, try and post it under Developers.

      If it was the 3.x.x series, it would be a bit more important. But this is the standard 2.x.x series. This isn't news for most of us.
      • I agree with the parent comment, except that I would say that the 2.x.x series is a big deal for most of us, since we're going to be running it for awhile, I think. As for the 2.5.x series, I could care less, its a development kernel, which should be considered beta quality at best and completely broken at worst. A new 2.5.x kernel is no news to me. 3.x.x is likely a long way off, so I'd consider it a big deal when the roll the 2.5.x development series over to the 2.6.x stable. Of course everyone will already be celebrating with several pints of Guiness hours before /. ends up posting the 2.6.x announcement. Heh.
    • I'll totally skirt around the issue of what Slashdot should and shouldn't post, and say this:

      I read this as "Linux Kernel 2.4.19 released," and was about to download it and install it on my box as a replacement for 2.4.16. Then I went to get a copy, and couldn't find it... Only then did I realized that it was the 2.5 series, not 2.4

    • I mean, they're making it sound as if this is a stable release. Usually /. would preface development kernel releases with "Developer...".

      You're right, that's not the sound of a stable release. A stable release has more oomph. "DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS!"

      :)

  • LOL (Score:5, Funny)

    by randombit ( 87792 ) on Sunday June 02, 2002 @04:31PM (#3627572) Homepage
    From the changelog:

    <rml@tech9.net>
    [PATCH] Robert Love likes leather and chains

    > Hmm. That patch does not compile. "p->cpu" does not exist, it's
    > "p->thread_info->cpu". Tssk.

    Ouch, I am bad. Sorry.

    Make the ChangeLog entry something really defamatory.

    Robert Love
    • [PATCH] Robert Love likes leather and chains

      I thought I would fill in the story ;-)

      I sent Linus a scheduler patch of some sort and - since I am working on 2.4 and 2.5 O(1) scheduler - I guess I pulled it from my 2.4 tree and it would not compile on 2.5.

      Linus sent me the "tssk tssk" email you see and I told him to log the fix under a dematory ChangeLog entry (as you can see) - the result is the above...he has a good sense of humor.

  • Worryingly low number of "beta" testers? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by hta ( 7593 ) on Sunday June 02, 2002 @04:32PM (#3627575) Homepage Journal
    In the old days, many many people used the 2.3 kernels.
    Today, the Linux Counter system statistics [li.org] show less than 1% of users using the "development" kernel.
    Is this a worrying aspect of the Linux community's development cycle?
    • Today, the Linux Counter system statistics ... show less than 1% of users using the "development" kernel.
      Is this a worrying aspect of the Linux community's development cycle?

      Or is it an indication that the numbers of professional linux users (who absolutely need stable kernels) is increasing?

      Just because the ratio of stable:beta kernel users is decreasing, it doesn't necessarily mean that the number of beta-version kernel users is waning.

      I'm encouraged by the lower stable:beta kernel ratio.
    • Conversely, it could be that more and more "normal" people are using Linux, thus pushing the development users down. This is a ratio we want to see decrease (as long as its associated with a large influx of genuine users).
    • 2.5.19 is hardly a "beta" kernel. I would even hesitate to call it an "alpha" kernel. Wait until later in the 2.5 series. Right now the core systems are still in flux.
      • I keep seeing comments like this and understand that you people have really serious things to do with your computers, but aren't you overestimating stability needs of people like me, the home user? I never ever had a serious problem with 2.4.x series, and I used almost all of them. Despite huge changelog, I don't think 2.4.19 is any worse. Infact, considering how much revisions 2.4.19 has gone thru before going gold, I expect it to be more stable than -say- 2.4.14. The flux you are talking about has been backported from 2.5 series, and added to an already stable kernel. No need to scare away people.
    • I think the Linux Counter system statistics are not accurate because that's an unscientific "poll". The information there is gathered from only 2,401 machines, which is obviously not representative of the entire population of Linux machines (which probably number in the millions?). Statistically we would say that there is not enough "power" to detect a statistical significance, because of this low-number sample.

      The other thing is that the people running that machine-update script are self-selecting. For any statistic to be accurate, it is important that the samples are chosen accurately (for example, a random sample or a stratified random sample). The Linux Counter sample selected themselves to participate, and that is of course not accurate.

      So I don't think the statistics presented there are accurate at all.
      • I think the Linux Counter system statistics are not accurate because that's an unscientific "poll". The information there is gathered from only 2,401 machines, which is obviously not representative of the entire population of Linux machines (which probably number in the millions?). Statistically we would say that there is not enough "power" to detect a statistical significance, because of this low-number sample.
        It calls itself a poll, right? How many polls question every single member of a group? its always a small segment, of which you then extrapolate the general statistics. Thats just...how they go...you know?
        • Yes, of course they poll a small segment (the sample) out of the entire member group (the population). It would be impossible to poll every Linux user in the world. My point is that the sample size is not big enough, and there are statistical methods to figure out how many is considered "big enough". I just feel that 2,401 machines out of millions are statistically not "big enough" to make this poll accurate.

          And even if 2,401 machines is enough.. this group is *self-selecting*. This means this group chose to participate because they are interested in it. Again that is not representative of the entire Linux population, because not all in the Linux population are interested in running that machine-update script or this poll.

          In a real survey, the researcher would first calculate the sample size that would be big enough to get accurate results. Next, figure out a proper sampling method. There are many ways to obtain your sample.. I'll just describe one here.. let's say, random sampling.

          In the random sampling method, the researcher would go randomly to any Linux user, and ask them questions like what kernel they're running and so on. In this case, we reach a proper number of Linux users.. whether or not they're interested in the poll or aware about it. They would continue doing this until they obtain the required sample size. This is in contrast with the Linux Counter poll, where the entire sample consist of only those who are interested in the poll. Thus, it is inaccurate.

          Random sampling is just one sampling method to make a fair survey with less errors.. there are other methods too but I won't go into their details unless you really want me to.

          That's the major problem with all online polls. That's why Slashdot polls have that line that says that Slashdot polls are:

          "wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane."

          And that's also why the QuickVote polls at CNN.com says:

          This QuickVote is not scientific and reflects the opinions of only those Internet users who have chosen to participate. The results cannot be assumed to represent the opinions of Internet users in general, nor the public as a whole.

          I hope this clarifies my points.
          • I just feel that 2,401 machines out of millions are statistically not "big enough" to make this poll accurate.

            Then don't "feel"... Calculate. You'll see that 2,401 is enough for just about any significance level you can think of. Statisticians deal with this stuff all the time. A sample of 2,401 is HUGE for this. Most Gallup polls only use a sample of 1,000 or so to calculate the opinion of the entire adult population of the United States. See: this [gallup.com] You're correct about the Linux poll probably not being a representative sample, but even that isn't known for sure. Care to take the data from this poll, data from a random sample and preform a simple hypothesis test? (Hint: It's expensive, time consuming, and in the end they might be the same.)

      • Come on, add all the machines you use. Let's get those stats bumped up a bit.
      • Of course the Linux Counter is self-selecting.
        But - if anything, the geekiness of the counter should select FOR the kind of people who participate in Linux kernel development. If even this clearly biased sample shows such a small percentage of Linux users spending time getting beyond the 2.4 series, does the Linux community have breadth enough to "continue the show"?

        Harald, alarmist
    • In the old days, many many people used the 2.3 kernels.Today, the Linux Counter system statistics [li.org] show less than 1% of users using the "development" kernel.
      Is this a worrying aspect of the Linux community's development cycle?
      In the old days, linux use was FAR less for production servers than it is now. Development boxes, and the occasional oddball's desktop.
      Now adays, its used as a desktop in corporate environments, as a production-level OS, and etc. Due to this, the % using the development kernel is going to be FAR less.
    • Maybe that's because most of the 2.5 series doesn't work right, has many broken drivers, and has many discussions of file system corruption on LKML. It's understandable, because developers have started in on some very fundamental changes.

      I try to run the bleeding edge and used all but a few of the 2.3 kernels. About half of 2.5.x series doesn't compile. Right now raid stuff doesn't work.
    • less than 1% of users using the "development" kernel

      Assuming the counter is accurate, even 1% of the user base is still quite a lot and probably includes those most capable of actually contributing to the development of the kernel.

      Still, at least personally my eagerness to run the latest kernels has been on the decline. I've been running Linux for over 10 years now. There was a time when I used to immediately patch in anything posted on the kernel mailing by Linus, and spent a considerable time testing and writing patches myself.

      These days all of my hardware has been supported by Linux for ages. The new kernels just don't seem to bring so many cool new features to my life as they used to, so I tend to go for a bit more sedate update pace now (of course, there is the occasional memory system rewrite, which makes one want to bite the bullet again). I suspect many of the old timers have the same experience. Besides, Linux performs so good I don't even have any reason to upgrade my hardware.
    • Yeah, that's because we spent so much time beta testing the 2.4 kernels that we're taking a short break.

  • User Prefs... (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by phyberop ( 535162 )
    Maybe there should be an option to "Exclude those damn Kernel Updates" in the user preferences.
    • God, it's not that big of a deal. You read the front page, you see it's a kernel update, you move on to the next story. Is that so hard?

      I, and others, like to read about the progress of the kernel, even if we don't download and compile every version. You're making a mountain out of a molehill here; my advice is to chill out, grab some alcohol from the fridge, and move on. It's obvious you need to relax.

  • So, when will we see 2.4.19? I thought that 2.4.19 was supposed to have been a shorter bake than 2.4.18, wasn't it?

    Also, I'm curious.. is there a "safe" way to play with the development kernels, if you don't have the time to debug filesystems or recover from disasters? are the file-system bugs as bad as they sound, or do they only affect non-ext2/ext3 file systems? does anyone have any "tricks" that they'd like to share? are the 2.5 kernels going to support using GCC 3.1 for greater speed?

  • Good news for PowerPC users (Score:3, Informative)

    by pinkpineapple ( 173261 ) on Sunday June 02, 2002 @04:43PM (#3627610) Homepage
    I found this kernel to be very stable and very reliable. This is very promising. I run JDK from blackdown and openoffice 1.0, as well as latest Mozilla, IRC, and got to admit that the system feels very responsive and extremelly feature rich. Hell, I can even use videolan with regionfree plugins. The 2.4 glitches for power saving features I experienced in the past seem to be gone too. Thumbs up for all the people who helped make this happen.

    PPA, the girl next door.

    • Re:Good news for PowerPC users (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      > I found this kernel to be [.....]
      >
      > PPA, the girl next door.

      The _girl_ ? Do you really exist?!
      If this is true you have shattered my view on the world.
      May I have your phone-number, please? I'd like to propose ASAP.
      • > > PPA, the girl next door.
        >
        > May I have your phone-number, please? I'd like to propose ASAP.

        Dude, she told you she lives "next door." I know that many slashdot geeks shy away from personal contact, but you may find walking one house over much more effective than using the phone.

  • Wow! (Score:1, Redundant)

    by mosch ( 204 )
    I'm sure a lot of people are going to complain that this is a useless article, and there's no point in advertising incremental progressions in developmental software. These people are missing the big picture. This patch fixes major issues such as:
    • An improperly sorted CREDITS file
    • a typo in dcache.c
    • removal of unused code in the nfs subsystem
    • consolidation of errno definitions
    • the spelling of a contributor's name
    • miscellaneous ia64 fixes
    Thank you slashdot, for keeping me informed, and for understanding the importance of randomly updating the public on the status of developmental software version numbers!
  • You might at first think that needing to have bugfixes put out every few days would be a black eye for Linux, but I'd like to suggest that the opposite is the case. Here are a list of benefits that the "kernel treadmill" provides:

    1) Keeps user skills fresh on how to tar zxf; cd; make; make install
    2) Frequent full source downloads lets developers, hosts and users all make sure their net connections are optimized
    3) Announcement on non-kernel-related sites keeps Linux, OS of the Gods, in the forefront of everyone's minds
    4) Announcement on non-kernel-related sites also ensures that stock analysts, mechanical engineers and daycare workers all get the latest source code to make "all bugs shallow"
    5) Let's slashbots who wouldn't know gcc from herpes simplex talk about "the kernel" as if they knew thing one about programming or Linux

  • Not for normal users (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Ti_Uhl ( 525480 )
    The latest stable release of the kernel is 2.4.19 the 2.5.x is still in beta release and shouldn't be used by normal users.
  • Old news, was released the 29. Still waiting for 2.5.20 :-)

    If you want a lot of 2.5 features without sacrificing to much then there is allways the jp kernel patches located here [infolinux.de]. It includes xfs, ext3 fixes, low-latency, alsa and a lot of other things.
  • Sheesh! (Score:4, Funny)
    by Lethyos (tofuchute@hotmail . c om) on Saturday June 01, @09:13AM (#3622181)
    (User #408045 Info | http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Thursday May 09, @03:25PM)

    Haven't you editors heard yet? BSD is dying! Get with the program and post another Linux 2.5 patch level increment announcement. Thank you!

    It's about time! 3 days? What took so long?

  • this is a fantastic coincedence (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    as Debian is planning the party for the 2.4 kernel based system, 'Woody', release. So far, the tables, guest speakers, live entertainment and beer (as in free?) are in the works and setup already. Much of the entertainment had no problem with the 2005 time of this event, but there were some that said 'it is just too early to plan that far ahead'. What they lack is VISION!

  • Did Linus earn his salary :) (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jukal ( 523582 ) on Sunday June 02, 2002 @05:33PM (#3627772) Journal
    I was interested to find out how much Linus has contributed to the dev. kernel during last month, I might as well post it here. Based on this he has followed the work multiple times a week during last month. And as I also see a couple of sunpoints, this means....ermm.... nothing.

    (29-May-2002)
    version: changelog entries
    2.5.19 : 7
    2.5.18 : 10
    2.5.17: 6
    2.5.16: 8
    2.5.15: 4
    2.5.14 : 2
    2.5.13: 3
    2.5.12: 5
    2.5.11: 5
    2.5.10: 10
    (24-Apr-2002)

  • OK, here's my stupid question of the week.

    What does the 2.5.x development kernel do that the stable 2.4.x kernel does not?

    What are the flashy new bells & whistles?

    No flames intended, I'm genuinely curious.

    • Alsa sound drivers! (Score:3, Informative)

      by gid ( 5195 )
      One of the big things I know is the integration of the Alsa Sound drivers [alsa-project.org].

      This is quite a big move and I'm glad, the old kernel sound drivers were getting horribly out of date and lacked many features, such as hardware mixing support to name one.

      I've been compiling the alsa drivers as modules for the entire 2.4.x series, and am *really* glad I won't have to be doing that any longer. :)
    • Includes ALSA support, and a bunch of low-latency improvements. Probably some efficiency improvements. A new build system.
    • I've no idea myself, but I found this [linuxhq.com] on linuxhq.

      From the brief glance, it seems like there are a number of rewrites of the experimental hacks in 2.4 ("Bluetooth no longer experimental", framebuffer rewrite, Video 4 Linux redesign, Generic ACPI, etc).

      Mostly stuff I wouldn't use in a hurry. After all, I use Linux for stability over Windows, and really cutting-edge stuff is secondary to rock-solidiness.

  • kernel.org silliness (Score:5, Informative)

    by suwain_2 ( 260792 ) on Sunday June 02, 2002 @05:54PM (#3627828) Journal
    Does anyone else find it absurd that they host the list of mirrors of their site... on their site?

    I did, and created a simple PHP script that will redirect you to a random mirror site. (My list of hosts that it uses is everyone with something greater than a T1.) I have very little bandwidth, and am not really supposed to run a webserver on my cable modem anyway, but perhaps someone with a "real" server, with PHP support, could put this up. It's probably not the best-written program, but it works. If someone wants to put it up on their high-bandwidth site and post links, I think it would be a great way to offload traffic from the main server, especially for when "bigger" things are released that cause the main site to hover just below 100 Mbps...

    <?php
    // select a mirror at random
    // I only have hosts with 10+ Mbit/sec here

    $hosts = array("http://www.internap.lkams.kernel.org/pub/li nux/", "http:
    //www.netnitco.lkams.kernel.org/pub/linux/ " , "http://www.llarian-net.lkams.kerne
    l.org/pub/lin ux/", "http://www.ihets.lkams.kernel.org/pub/linux/", "http://www.m
    idco.lkams.kernel.org/pub/linux/", "http://www.ftp-orst-edu.lkams.kernel.org/pub
    /li n ux/", "http://www.valinux.lkams.kernel.org/pub/linux/", "http://www.uw-madis
    on.lkams.kernel.org/pub/linu x/", "http://www.csl-mirror.lkams.kernel.org/pub/lin
    u x/", "http://www.ymbnet.lkams.kernel.org/pub/linux/", "http://www.themoes-us.lk
    ams.kernel.org/pub/linu x/", "http://www.teleglobe-us.lkams.kernel.org/pub/linu x/
    ", "http://www.secsup-org.lkams.kernel.org/pub/linux/ ");

    $max = count($hosts);
    $site = rand(0, $max);

    header("Location: $hosts[$site]");
    exit;

    ?>

    Note that this code uses VERY little bandwidth, since all it sends is an HTTP redirect.
  • I don't speak for everyone, but it seems the reason that not as many people are using development kernels is because the 2.4.x series has all of the hardware support that most of us need. I have yet to come across a device that my 2.4.18 cannot support. The only reason I used the 2.3.x kernels when they were released was because 2.2.x was not cutting it in terms of hardware support. Now, I may just want to try 2.5.x just to see the difference in performance with that preemt patch, but I may be able to contain my excitement until 2.6 rolls out.
  • Can anyone tell me if its now safe to install on a VIA K7T266 board? I had lost interrupts and system freezes all over the place before.
    • Can anyone tell me if its now safe to install on a VIA K7T266 board? I had lost interrupts and system freezes all over the place before.

      I'm using a VIA K7T266 motherboard currently. I have no freezes whatsoever. Using 2.4.18 w/ preemptable patch on gentoo.

      If you still have crashes, select yer bootimage and append mem=nopentium and you will no longer get crashes.

      • Sorry, but that doesn't solve all problems. I'm having problems with DRI and OpenGL acceleration on my Matrox G450. It's not the Athlon/AGP bug, but it is quite probably a VIA chipset timing issue.

        I'm a little hesitant to file this on the LKML, as I have already filed it in the DRI bug reporting system [sourceforge.net]. I may post it to the LKML eventually, as I have heard the DRI guys are rather busy, and if it really is a VIA chipset issue, it is not a DRI bug, but a general kernel bug, right?

        Mart

  • well i've tried it.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by 7-Vodka ( 195504 ) on Sunday June 02, 2002 @06:37PM (#3627973) Journal
    And just like all the other 2.5's i've tried it wouldn't even build. I'd test it but since it won't build, I can't run it.

    That's a big change from 2.3's, they would almost always build for me.

    While this is the topic... does anyone know if 2.4.19 will ever come out of RC stage?

    • It appears I've jinxed myself. Slashdot posts must have some magical effects. As soon as I complain that the previous 19 2.5 kernels won't build for me the 20th is released and now I'll have to eat my words.

      uh.. not quite. As I write this I'm having to disable scsi support because "Error: please fix me". I'll do w/o my burner to test it anyway.

      Thanks magical /.
      Now I'm off to post some complaints about other stuff so it should all be fixed in a minute. No need to thank me.

    • Linus Linus! They've just posted about the 2.5.19 release on /. and kernel.org is being hammered, we're about to have thousands of new testers!

      Oh no! 2.5.19 is full of trivial bugs for which I have patches, they will all fail in the compile stage and give up *frown*.

      Quickly Linus, make a new release!

  • From the changelog:

    -------
    [PATCH] DIE "Russel", DIE!

    My name is *not* GPL: you may not derive works without approval.

    Rusty.
    PS. I've also applied for a patent...
    --------

    I'm guessing he's referring to 'Rusty Russell'? Just thought I'd post it for anyone who missed it, seems a strange thing to put in the changelog.

  • 2.4.19?! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by charnerd ( 570806 )
    Is seems to me that 2.4.19 should be released already, especially since it's been like 4 months and the 2.4.18 release was bungled. WTF is up? Put an rc release then release already!

    I am getting increasingly uneasy about using a kernel in which development on it appears to have STOPPED! I mean, the whole world uses this kernel branch pretty-much...

  • linux is unstable (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Sigh, why publicize and push this unstable version of linux on people where there's a true Unix(tm) descendant which is much more stable and runs on your PC? FreeBSD must be the best kept secret in the world.

  • 2.5.20 is out... (Score:4, Informative)

    by charnerd ( 570806 ) on Sunday June 02, 2002 @10:05PM (#3628578) Homepage
    2.5.20 appears to be out already at kernel.org.

  • 2.5.20 (Score:2, Insightful)

    by bonch ( 38532 )
    I just checked kernel.org, 2.5.20 is already up. This is one of the problems with posting endless updates about minor version upgrades. Should we expect another kernel article on Tuesday?

Slashdot Top Deals

THEGODDESSOFTHENETHASTWISTINGFINGERSANDHERVOICEISLIKEAJAVELININTHENIGHTDUDE

Close