Linux Kernel 2.4.21 Released 539
An anonymous reader writes "After > 6 months of waiting, 2.4.21 is here. Lots of cleanups, and a patch which gives a MAJOR boost to the 'feel' of the system under heavy disk IO, especially on IDE systems. As usual, available from your local kernel.org mirror or ftp.COUNTRYCODE.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/! Tidbit: 'Current bandwidth utilization 131.72 Mbit/s '." See the Changelog for new stuff.
Looks good.. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Looks good.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Started to think 2.4.x was dead (Score:5, Interesting)
Phathead
Re:Started to think 2.4.x was dead (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Started to think 2.4.x was dead (Score:5, Informative)
Even 2.0.X is still maintained. It currently stands at 2.0.40-rc6 (almost one year old).
Re:Started to think 2.4.x was dead (Score:5, Informative)
As long as it's not available from ftp://ftp.kernel.org or http://www.kernel.org, there is no newer version of the linux kernel.
The same applies to the ftp://gcc.gnu.org and GCC (not the website, they are always a little bit lame updating it).
So if you say
'Mandrake has already put the "2.4.21" kernel in their 9.1 release'
your are wrong! They didn't. They lied to you. Or you are mistaken. Or they used a prerelease and renamed it 2.4.21.
And no, 2.4.21 it's not 'too late'. Look at the Changelog and what huge amount of bugfixing has been done. And all those updates to the drivers!
True, 2.6 will feature a log of nice extra stuff, but I guess 99.9% of all linux users are happy with just the features 2.4 has. They simply don't need support for NUMA, 64bit dev_t or Zero-copy NFS.
Re:Started to think 2.4.x was dead (Score:3, Funny)
Thanks. I needed that!
It's Friday, 13th, you know
BitTorrent (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:BitTorrent (Score:5, Informative)
Re:BitTorrent (Score:2)
And the patch is only suitable for people who already have 2.4.20. Everyone else either must download and apply multiple patches, or just get the full source and be done with it.
Re:BitTorrent (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, right, and people should be writing in Esperanto on their Dvorak layout keyboards, too, but that's about the same likelihood.
If they _really_ want people to actually use the patches, they should release the patches first, wait about a week, THEN release the full kernels. Evil, I know.
Re:BitTorrent (Score:5, Funny)
Est tajp jam nun, kun Dvorak... sed mi.
Re:BitTorrent (Score:5, Informative)
http://66.227.104.34/linux-2.4.21.tar.bz2.torre
Just to get these out of the way... (Score:5, Funny)
Oh man! My 286 just finished compiling 2.4.20!
or
Oh man! I was downloading at 4000 K/sec before this story showed up. Thanks a lot Slashdot!
Re:Just to get these out of the way... (Score:2)
Re:Just to get these out of the way... (Score:2)
Re:Just to get these out of the way... (Score:3, Informative)
Sorry to burst your bubble...
Re:Impressive! (Score:4, Funny)
Or maybe he's cross-compiling.
Or...
Shut up
Be gentle to the mirrors (Score:5, Informative)
cd
bzcat
make oldconfig
Re:Be gentle to the mirrors (Score:2)
Re:oops! My bad.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Debian prides itself on an enormous amount of packages... nearly twice as many, counting bytes, as RedHat provides. To attempt to download "a copy of Debian" is wrong and wasteful. The fun of Debian comes in when you decide, on the spur of the moment, to try some exotic free software program and can apt-get it in a much less time that it would take to even figure out the name of the RPM you'd need to install on a "normal" Linux system.
Even if the desired install computer doesn't have fast internet access, burning 7 CDs is excessive. There probabably won't even be 2 CDs worth of packages you really want to install. Of the top ten largest packages [debian.org] in Debian, six of them are only desirable for hardcore software developers.
Re:oops! My bad.... (Score:3, Interesting)
As in, "Tank, I need a pilot program for a V-212 helicopter."
I always forget to install wget until I type it in and realize I haven't installed it. Five seconds and one apt-get later, I can just hit up twice and enter once.
Re:oops! My bad.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if you install packages from CD-Rom, you'll use the same interface as if you were getting it live from HTTP. The only difference is that it'll prompt you to insert the right disc first... and since most packages are small, it'll often take more time for you to find the disc than to just get it from the server.
You didn't mention if you had downloaded the stable or testing Debian... testing is generally prefered, because it's not as painfully obselete. If you value stability, "stable" is good of course. But if you want to have fun and experiment, then newer is better. And if you're using "testing", then you'll probably want to keep up with changes made after the CDs were burnt. Debian "testing" CD-Roms go obselete really fast.
I don't know why you have a problem with the naming of RPMs. I find that it is usually the same as the program or package name.
RPM names also contain at least the version string, and often an indication of which architecture the software will run on. Sometimes supported OS versions are mixed in too. For example, when I tried to install a package [rpmfind.net] on a Red Hat system, I had to download that RPM. Then go to install it, and find out I needed multiple other RPMs [rpmfind.net] first, which need even more RPMs [rpmfind.net] to work.
The point of apt-get is you, the installing user, never even see the *.deb file that the package actually comes in. The hunt for dependencies is completely hidden from you.
Of course, RedHat users can optionally run apt-get themselves, but that's not formally supported by the distribution developer.
I won't go into the whole problem of not getting *.deb files for new, bleeding edge software. It's an accepted fact that Debian users who wish to try something brand-new will be compiling it themselves.
Re:Be gentle to the mirrors (Score:4, Informative)
But, is anyone actually running vanilla 2.4.20, or keeping it in
Of course, you might still have the official linux-2.4.20.tar.bz2 tarball sitting around somewhere, and if you do you can use that and the patch-2.4.21.
Re:Vendor Kernels (Score:3, Informative)
If you install the
Re:Be gentle to the mirrors (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Be gentle to the mirrors (Score:3, Funny)
mail -s "My resume" jobs@microsoft.com
Re:Be gentle to the mirrors (Score:3, Insightful)
bzcat
make oldconfig
blah blah blah
And you people still wonder why so many people stick to Windows instead of trying Linux? When I can double-click an icon and click OK and have it install the updates give me a call.
What do you expect? Vanilla kernel compiles/updates aren't for the average joe. They can wait for their easy distro update.
Re:Be gentle to the mirrors (Score:2, Insightful)
> When I can double-click an icon and click OK and have it install the updates give me a call.
Should we let you know when it gets oppressive EULAs and DRM controlled by a single company too? I wouldn't hold your breath.
Re:Be gentle to the mirrors (Score:5, Funny)
Wow, what icon can I click on in Windows to compile a new version of the OS from source code?
Re:Be gentle to the mirrors (Score:3, Informative)
Sorry I cannot help you there. RedHat has something very similar, but you only have to click once on the icon not doubleclick.
Admin Question (Score:3, Funny)
should I go up tp 2.4.21
How often should I build the new kernels for production servers (should I even be using 2.4? ie, stick with 2.2)
Thanks for the Help!
Re:Admin Question (Score:5, Insightful)
If the server(s) is/are performing correctly, why bother upgrading? What will it buy you? Just apply security patches and don't tinker with anything else.
Re:Admin Question (Score:3, Informative)
Uh, because there were several vulnerabilities found in the 2.4.20 kernels which were only fixed in the -rc's? See this summary [lwn.net].
Just apply security patches and don't tinker with anything else.
Sometimes the kernel needs security patches too.
Re:Admin Question (Score:5, Funny)
I get paid good money to come in and clean shops up after sloppy Admins have created unstable messes... :)
Re:Admin Question (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Admin Question (Score:4, Informative)
Well, the 2.4.21 kernel was (in reality) the RC-8. Look at the changelog and see if any of that applies to you. If so then yes, it's would be wise to upgrade. If not, then it's your call. This is why the changlog exists...
Re:Admin Question (Score:5, Informative)
should I go up tp 2.4.21
If stability is important to you, you should only use proven, stable kernels on a production server.
Unless there is some new feature that you absolutely need RIGHT NOW and cannot wait, it is very bad to use 2.4.20-rc7 on a production server. The "rc" stands for "release candidate", which means that the kernel is almost ready to be used by the public, but needs people to test it first.
If you care about system stability, you should not be testing the kernel on a production machine. If you do want to test the kernel, do so on a test machine that is not a mission critical machine.
On several occasions in the past, a release-candidate kernel introduced new code which would crash or corrupt systems that used the kernel.
However, if 2.4.20-rc7 is not crashing on you, you don't need to upgrade to 2.4.21 right away. Review the kernel changelog, and see if any of the changes apply to you. Wait a few days (or weeks), and upgrade to 2.4.21 when it's convenient to you.
Personally, unless there is some urgent fix that I need in the new kernel, I always wait a few weeks or months before upgrading the kernel, just in case some wierd bug was introduced into the new kernel version. During those weeks or months, I usually test the new kernel on a test machine and see if anything wierd happens.
Re:Linux Tech. Support (Score:4, Insightful)
Broadcom support (Score:2)
Re:Broadcom support (Score:2)
Anyway...I don't think Hell has frozen over quite yet
I take it... (Score:3, Funny)
why not posting the http links instead of the ftp? (Score:2, Informative)
for example.
ftp needs much more time and authentication stuff for login, commandos and so forth.
fr [kernel.org]
jp [kernel.org]
and so on...
Re:why not posting the http links instead of the f (Score:3, Informative)
Re:why not posting the http links instead of the f (Score:4, Funny)
Man, can't a guy download a kernel via FTP without a bunch of armed dudes storming the place? Those SCO guys just don't know when to give it up.
Re:why not posting the http links instead of the f (Score:4, Informative)
Re:why not posting the http links instead of the f (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:why not posting the http links instead of the f (Score:3)
2. ????????
3. PROFIT!!!!!
Dang, I need a beowulf cluster to compile this new kernel! I oughta get a soviet russian to do it for me. All your base are belong to slashdotted kernel.org!
Ahhh, feel the karma burnin'...
Enjoy, losers! (Score:5, Funny)
(Okay, okay; I'm sitting at home in my underpants reloading slashdot to see if new stories are posted. I'll go download it now.)
excellent, we can switch to this (Score:5, Funny)
Re:excellent, we can switch to this (SCO) (Score:5, Funny)
> o [Bluetooth] Use very short disconnect timeout for SCO connections.
> o [Bluetooth] Kill incoming SCO connection when SCO socket is closed.
> o [Bluetooth] Support for SCO (voice) over HCI USB
Are these the lines SCO's bitching about?
Re:excellent, we can switch to this (SCO) (Score:4, Informative)
> o [Bluetooth] Use very short disconnect timeout for SCO connections.
> o [Bluetooth] Kill incoming SCO connection when SCO socket is closed.
> o [Bluetooth] Support for SCO (voice) over HCI USB
Are these the lines SCO's bitching about?
Nope. SCO in the bluetooth world means Synchronous Connection Oriented link.
Used mostly with bluetooth wireless handsfree devices. [phonearena.com]
2.6? (Score:2)
heres how to compile the kernel (Score:3, Informative)
$ make menuconfig # Replace menuconfig with xconfig if you want
-Select the options you need in your kernel and save it
$ make dep bzImage
-Look in arch//boot/ for the bzImage file
-Install it for your favourite bootloader (grub/lilo) and reboot machine
-gloat
Re:heres how to compile the kernel (Score:2, Informative)
Re:heres how to compile the kernel (Score:4, Funny)
make modules
make modules_install
Unless you are a masochistic...er, monolithic kernel builder =)
Re:heres how to compile the kernel (Score:3, Informative)
# make menuconfig
# make dep clean modules bzImage
(assuming all's good)
make modules_install install
The scripts have been able to install the kernel itself by itself for quite a while and also detect lilo or grub or whatever. I have no idea why people keep telling the n00bs to cp
Re:heres how to compile the kernel (Score:3, Interesting)
Disc IO Related Lockups? (Score:2, Interesting)
Agree, noticed odd CPU load when burning (Score:3)
I'll second that. I noticed after going to 2.4.20 that whenever I burn a CD(and this is on an 8x writer, not exactly 'fast'), the CPU(Athlon 1.5ghz) goes to 30%, all of it system time-and the system slows to a crawl, cursor jumping and everything-which is new- and I've got 32bit IO and unmasked IRQs set on all my IDE devices....
This is a known problem, if: (Score:5, Informative)
-You have an IDE CD burner
-You are using IDE-SCSI emulation
-You are burning a CD with a blocksize other than 2048 (such as redbook audio, or (S)VCD, etc..)
If the above are all true, the ide-scsi emulation reverts to PIO mode. Supposedly this will be fixed for 2.6
Re:Disc IO Related Lockups? (Score:3, Insightful)
Then why does windows lock up tight whenever you need to delete a large file? Windows falls to pieces whenever your doing anything with high IO. Feel free to lower the priority of the high IO process because that's the only way you'll even be able to open Notepad once a high IO task starts in Windows 2k/XP. You really think explorer isn't a crippled piece of shit? Windows doesn'
Ah (Score:3, Funny)
RedHat kernels (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: RedHat kernels (Score:5, Interesting)
> Hoping RH pushes updated kernels for RH9. Piss-poor IDE disk performance is my one big gripe with my Linux boxen at the moment; whole machine feels like shit when something heavy is running the disk in the background.
\AOL{meetoo}. Actually, even if I just had lots of windows open and not much CPU or disk traffic my UI felt like Windows 95, repeatedly coming to a screeching halt for several seconds at a time, usually when switching from one window or desktop to another.
I finally failed back to an older kernel I still had around, and the problem went away. I don't know whether the problem was with the 2.4.20 series kernels (I tried three) or the rumored Red Hack kernel hack that they purportedly distribute for RH9 (all three I tried were from RH RPMs). I'm just glad I was able to make it go away.
Re: RedHat kernels (Score:3)
In fact, I switched to a stock Linus 2.4.20 kernel just last night. So far, no problems. Before, my desktop felt like treacle.
I think I might upgrade to 2.4.21, maybe even apply to pre-empt/low-latency patches. I'm feeling adventurous.
My old SuSE 8.0 box, that used 2.4.18, worked just fine, so I think it's something that red hat screwed up. There's a bug in their bugzilla about some people experiencing swap storms so bad it takes 10 minutes for a newline in a shell!
Re:RedHat kernels (Score:5, Informative)
Re:RedHat kernels (Score:3, Informative)
Try out this newest kernel or the preempt patches. ALso like someone else said make sure you have the right hard drive flags set. After making sure your hdparm setting are correct tune ext3 as well.
Uhh....what timing (Score:5, Funny)
Behind the curve already- (Score:2)
I just installed Rehhat 9 on my tecra 8100 and am in the process of understanding linux and now this comes along! I'm already behind the curve and I feel my knowledge slipping away from my grasp, furthe...
(with apologies to Dilbert)
GrSecurity update. (Score:3, Informative)
13th? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:13th? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:13th? (Score:3)
I'm not familiar enough with Linux to understand this joke. Somebody please explain it?
(sorry to be a spoilsport!)
Re:13th? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:13th? (Score:4, Informative)
Thanksgiving 2002 saw the 2.4.20 data corruption on umount [kerneltrap.org] kernel released; thanksgiving 2001 saw the famous 2.4.15 "greased turkey" data corruption on umount kernel released.
There have been other kernels with problems, but it seems that the data corruption bugs tend to arrive with thanksgiving.
Make mine unixfree, please (Score:4, Funny)
Um, can I get mine without the SCO code, please? That Darrell McBride is a scary man:
how ironic... (Score:3, Funny)
2.4.21 (Score:5, Informative)
They now have Opteron support in there.. I knew it was in the pre, I was just wondering if the new kernel or the rest of my hardware would show up first. I have everything for a dual Opteron system, except the processors and case. I'm so anxious, I'm going to burst.
( ) 386
( ) 486
( ) 586/K5/5x86/6x86/6x86MX
( ) Pentium-Classic
( ) Pentium-MMX
( ) Pentium-Pro/Celeron/Pentium-II
( ) Pentium-III/Celeron(Coppermine)
( ) Pentium-4
( ) K6/K6-II/K6-III
( ) Athlon/Duron/K7
(X) Opteron/Athlon64/Hammer/K8
( ) Elan
( ) Crusoe
( ) Winchip-C6
( ) Winchip-2
( ) Winchip-2A/Winchip-3
( ) CyrixIII/VIA-C3
( ) VIA-C3-2
I'm going to be a compiling fool when the rest of the parts show up.
BitTorrent Download Link (Score:5, Informative)
ccache for the compulsive kernel compiler (Score:3, Interesting)
From their page: So, if your normal kernel build command is: then, your ccache version of that command would be: Trust me, it will save you a lot of time, especially if you are constantly tweaking your config settings and recompiling all the time.
If you compile as root, usually the cache directory will be
You can tell ccache to only reserve so much disk space for itself by issuing a command to reserve 100M.
Re:ccache for the compulsive kernel compiler (Score:3, Informative)
distcc.samba.org [samba.org]. It's another fine piece of coding from the Samba team. It uses your standard gcc, and does parallel builds on other machines. Really speeds things up.
Omitted From Changelog (Score:5, Funny)
- Replaced offending SCO source code with ASCII art of a middle finger.
Wow, lotsa changes! (Score:5, Funny)
Also, when does Alan Cox sleep? Prehaps he's a new form of undead with an affinity for coding? Maybe he has cloned himself a few times? Alan, however you're doing it, we appreciate all of your hard work. Now go take a nice, long nap.
Re:Wow, lotsa changes! (Score:5, Funny)
I believe there was even an X-File about it.. some shack in the middle of nowhere with a T1.
What sort of a slashdotting is this? (Score:3, Funny)
as a side note....for LP Patch users (Score:3, Informative)
Use 2.4.20 source
patch for LPP
patch to 2.4.21
Voila... that nice Purdy linux boot screen is still there for your relatives that ball up on the floor crying when the boot messages start flying...
kernel.org is inappropriate (Score:3, Interesting)
OT: 2.5.x and nvidia drivers (Score:3, Informative)
One can download the nvidia driver from ftp://download.nvidia.com (the website only seems to link an "installer" version, which was irritating)
Now I'm happily runny mozilla-xft without those buggy artifacts the nv driver has-- and GL is always nice...
Re:unstable 2.5 (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Quick Question (Score:5, Informative)
$ cd linux-2.4.21
$ make oldconfig
Re:Quick Question (Score:3, Informative)
make oldconfig
That will only prompt you for new stuff, rather than go back through every single option.
Re:Quick Question (Score:5, Interesting)
When there's a compelling reason to upgrade. Those fall into two categories:
Any other reason is superfluous, especially for a server machine.
The kernel config writes a .config file in the source root. Use that. If you patch rather than grabbing completely new sources, you won't even need to worry about copying that file around (unless you do a make mrproper, which you probably don't need to do unless stuff starts breaking during compile).
Years ago, back when the kernel was being updated nearly every other week rather than once every few months (2.0/2.2 time frame), I would always download the very latest kernel and compile that. Coincidentally, I was also learning Linux at the time, so I didn't mind spending time on stuff like that, and I was in school which meant a lot more free time. These days, my only linux box is a server, so unless there's a security fix I'm inclined to just leave the box alone. It's certainly easer not to upgrade than it is to upgrade.
Re:Quick Question (Score:2, Informative)
This seems to be frequent question. I'd say that you don't need to compile new kernel until the old one doesn't have the xyz feature that you need and/or you feel that the new kernel is far more reliable and faster.
In other words: some still use 2.2 series because there is no reason (for them) to upgrade.
Remember that you can use modules to get that xyz feature..
Re:Quick Question (Score:3, Informative)
Is there a way I can easily use the old configuration? Any HOW-TO on this?
Copy the old arch/$(ARCH)/config.in file to the new tree and 'make oldconfig'
Re:2.6 kernel (Score:2)
So 6 months to a year from last week.
The late 2.5.x series is shaping up nicely though. I run it on my home machine and my workstation in the office.
Re:Excelent (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Is it worth upgrading for old Red Hat Linux 7.x (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, you might want to give the ALSA drivers a chance. The new kernels are pushing it as the new sound architecture for Linux, and sometimes they make a big difference. Besides, having everything set up for ALSA and running properly will make
Re:Intel SATA Support (Score:4, Informative)
Re:2.4.21? (Score:3, Informative)