News for nerds, stuff that matters

[  faq |  code |  awards |  journals |  subscribe |  older stuff |  rob's page |  preferences |  submit story |  advertising |  supporters |  past polls |  topics |  about |  bugs |  jobs |  hof ]

Linux 2.4.22 Stable Kernel Released

Linux | Posted by simoniker on 2003-08-25 11:42
from the latest-and-greatest dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Marcelo Tosatti has officially released another stable 2.4 Linux kernel. 2.4.22 was released early this morning and includes a lengthy list of fixes. It follows the last stable kernel in this tree, 2.4.21, by a little over two months."


daeley (126313)

  (email not shown publicly)
Karma: Excellent

Being pithily witty on /. since last millennium. Delve into more astoundingly interesting miscellany, including obsessions, code, and writing at Celsius1414.

Related Links

· Dev Tools DevChannel
· Compare the best prices on: Software/Operating Systems
· released
· lengthy list
· More Linux stories
· Also by simoniker


· LPI certification: Compiling Sources and Managing Libs
· OSSTMM 2.1 Released
· Linux Ported To Multi-Core DSP
· Perl Modules as RPM Packages
· Netgear Routers DoS UWisc Time Server
· Wiring A Vintage Teletype To The Internet
· Linux Guru Alan Cox Takes A Year Off
· mod_caml Comes Of Age
· Four Microsoft Programming Languages Compared
· Visual Age for Smalltalk For Non-Comm Use

Silent Pump for Water-Cooled PCs
Linux 2.4.22 Stable Kernel Released | Preferences | Top | 65 comments | Search Discussion
Threshold: Save:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2

What IS NEW!!! (Score:5, Informative)
by Anonymous Coward on 2003-08-25 11:49 (#6786246)

Being a LKML lurker, here are a few of the new features.

[ Reply to This ]

torrents available (Score:5, Informative)
by gordlea (258731) Neutral < minus author> on 2003-08-25 11:52 (#6786270)

For those of you who use bittorrent, try:

linux-2.4.22.tar.bz2 []
patch-2.4.22.bz2 []

[ Reply to This ]

    ready to go.. (Score:4, Funny)
    by Anonymous Coward on 2003-08-25 11:45 (#6786208)

    *downloads and sends check to SCO*

    [ Reply to This ]

      2.4 VS 2.6 Performance (Score:4, Interesting)
      by Hornsby (63501) Neutral on 2003-08-25 11:46 (#6786215)

      I'm curious if anybody has experienced dramatic performance increases running X when switching from 2.4 to the 2.6 testing branch of the kernel.

      [ Reply to This ]

        Re:2.4 VS 2.6 Performance (Score:3, Informative)
        by daserver (524964) Neutral on 2003-08-25 11:53 (#6786283)
        ( )

        I've been running the 2.6 test for a while and the latest O1int patches from con have really made this a pleasure for desktop users. 2.6-test3-mm2 had massive skips when playing xmms and untaring, like 2.4 also has on my machine. But 2.6-test4-mm1 completely fixed this. I have not had a skip yet. Please not that this is from normal usage.

        [ Reply to This | Parent ]

          Re:2.4 VS 2.6 Performance (Score:2, Funny)
          by Gherald (682277) Neutral on 2003-08-25 11:54 (#6786290)

          I have a friend who's mouse ended up moving across the screen almost 10 times faster than usual with 2.6-test2.

          We joked about the 1000% increase in performance.

          [ Reply to This | Parent ]

          Re:2.4 VS 2.6 Performance (Score:2)
          by NightHwk1 (172799) Neutral <jon.bandedartists@com> on 2003-08-25 11:58 (#6786348)
          ( )

          I switched from linux-2.4.20-gentoo1 to linux-2.6.0-test3-mm3 and X seems much more responsive.. no more jumpy mouse cursors, and I no longer have a problem with memory leaks.

          Switching to ALSA from OSS is cool, I suppose.. though I don't notice any benefits from it yet, and I'm waiting to see what the sysfs is all about.

          Anyway, things are working better than they did before. I would recommend upgrading to 2.6 as soon as its released.

          [ Reply to This | Parent ]

            Re:2.4 VS 2.6 Performance (Score:1)
            by 955301 (209856) Neutral on 2003-08-25 11:59 (#6786355)

            Absolutely! I'm not sure how to qualify it other than to say that X comes up more aggressively, it's more responsive to user input, and I haven't had any nasty spills with test3 so far.

            It's probably not the smartest thing I've done running on a test kernel for my work notebook, but the added functionality including support for all of the hardware on a Sager 4760 (save the build in vid camera) makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.

            It's just a shame that the Cisco VPN client isn't out for 2.6 (that I'm aware of - please correct me if I'm wrong). Otherwise I would be all set.

            [ Reply to This | Parent ]
            • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.

            Changelog 2.4.21 - 2.4.22?? (Score:4, Insightful)
            by simetra (155655) Neutral on 2003-08-25 11:50 (#6786257)
            ( | Last Journal: 2003-05-31 21:24 )

            Is there such a thing? It's tiresome reading through all the changelogs (2.4.21 -> pre1 -> pre2 -> etc).


            [ Reply to This ]

              Re:Changelog 2.4.21 - 2.4.22?? (Score:2)
              by Rushuru (135939) Neutral on 2003-08-25 11:59 (#6786353)

              I miss the old (pre bk changelogs)

              They were only a few lines long (say 5-15) and looked a bit like this
              -ACPI fixes (Linus)
              -XYZ driver updates (Alan)

              Sure they were a lot less detailed, but at least they were "moderate-geek compliant".

              With the new changelogs, I read the first few lines and then I give up, because it's too long and too complicated.

              [ Reply to This | Parent ]

              Most important fix. (Score:4, Funny)
              by bfl (619363) Neutral on 2003-08-25 11:54 (#6786293)

              Kai Makisara:
              o Change Kai Makisara's email address
              I was wondering when someone would get around to this.

              [ Reply to This ]

                Are we ever going to get hibernate? (Score:4, Interesting)
                by Malc (1751) Neutral on 2003-08-25 11:54 (#6786295)

                Summary of changes from v2.4.22-rc2 to v2.4.22-rc3

                    o ACPI update
                    o ACPI build fix
                    o linux-acpi-2.4.22.patch

                [ Reply to This ]

                  Too fast... again! (Score:2, Interesting)
                  by ospirata (565063) Neutral on 2003-08-25 11:45 (#6786207)

                  Doesn't this realese seems like the 2.4.13? The RCs came out just one week after the other. Please God, hope to have no VM issue!

                  [ Reply to This ]

                  So Many Kernels (Score:2, Funny)
                  by Spencerian (465343) Friend of Friend on 2003-08-25 11:47 (#6786231)
                  ( )

                  ...and no popcorn...!

                  WTF is it with this machine I bought that doesn't give me my popcorn when I give it kernels?!

                  Ah, forget it. I'll go back to closing and opening Windows and see if it's more likely I'll get some fresh air in the house.

                  [ Reply to This ]

                  New Kernel doesn't matter here. (Score:2, Offtopic)
                  by deathcow (455995) Neutral on 2003-08-25 11:55 (#6786310)

                  Mod me off-topic if you wish, I for one welcome our new off-topic overlords.

                  We don't need a new kernel for now. The existing kernel has been highly stable in the types of jobs we throw at it. But that's not why it doesn't matter. Our director has finally handed down the "No more Linux installs" message. Here is the message:

                  As some of you may know. SCO has a lawsuit filed against IBM for breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, etc. The bottom line of this disagreement is that SCO is accusing IBM of including some of SCO's trade secrets (proprietary code) in its Linux kernel and that this source code has also been included in the Linux kernel available off the Internet.

                  To top all of this off, the US Copyright Office awarded SCO a copyright to System IV Unix last month. SCO, through a series of mergers and acquisitions, acquired the patents, copyrights, etc to System IV Unix that was originally developed by Bell Labs in 1969. About this same time, SCO created a new division whose only purpose in life was to license Linux and Unix to end users.

                  Because of all of this confusion, I have asked our legal eagles to give me an opinion as to whether or not our recent installation of Linux systems in the (our department name) places (our company name) in any sort of jeopardy. Frankly, I think that SCO is simply struggling for survival as it is in severe financial trouble. I also think that any rights SCO may have think it had at one time has been abrogated since SCO was (until last month) freely distributing Linux on its web site under the GNU General Public License.

                  But until I receive an opinion from Legal, we will not deploy any more Linux systems.

                  p.s. We are a 1200 employee telecommunications company, ISP, cable TV, long distance telephone, etc.

                  [ Reply to This ]
                    (1) | 2

                    [  faq |  code |  awards |  journals |  subscribe |  older stuff |  rob's page |  preferences |  submit story |  advertising |  supporters |  past polls |  topics |  about |  bugs |  jobs |  hof ]

                    To add insult to injury. -- Phaedrus

                    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2003 OSDN.