LinuxQuestions.org
Visit the LQ Articles and Editorials section
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Software > Linux - Kernel
User Name
Password
Linux - Kernel This forum is for all discussion relating to the Linux kernel.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 05-15-2009, 05:26 AM   #1
nilathinesh
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Distribution: Fedora 7 & 9, Ubuntu
Posts: 41

Rep: Reputation: 15
Question reg. Kernel Version Number


Hello all,

1).. As newbie..i am not knowing on
HOW TO IDENTIFY a ".ko" is meant for which version of kernel ?;
is there any command that extracts the Version Information of the .KO file..

2) May be it is silly, but just want to clear the Gray point about the kernel version..

i have read somewhere about the kernel versioning, that the linux kernel version that ends with EVEN number is a stable one and
the ODD number is developmental version. (not sure it is applicable only to MAJOR number)

but recently i have seen in http://www.kernel.org as
2.6.29.3 as stable version .. this contradicts? can any one clarify me..

thanking you in advance.
 
Old 05-15-2009, 07:52 AM   #2
sunr2007
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2009
Location: Bangalore , India
Distribution: Fedora 12
Posts: 65

Rep: Reputation: 17
@ above
a .ko is meant for kernel version which u have compiled in module makefile of try to load it through insmod ./*.ko it will give the version no if its not correct . else its same as ur kernel version though which u can get through uname -a .

and that notion abt even no bein stable and odd being unstable is no longer applicable for the 2.6.x kernel series. all versions of 2.6.x are stable versions. btw u can make one module compiled for one version make to work for another kernel version by enabling MOD_VERSIONING support in the kernel options when compiling.
warm regards,
Ravi Kulkarni.
 
Old 05-15-2009, 07:59 AM   #3
syg00
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Distribution: Lots ...
Posts: 12,351

Rep: Reputation: 1041Reputation: 1041Reputation: 1041Reputation: 1041Reputation: 1041Reputation: 1041Reputation: 1041Reputation: 1041
2.4 was stable, 2.5 was testing, 2.6 is stable
The old idea was dropped after some discussion with 2.6 - Linus hasn't (really) decided what will happen in future.
 
Old 05-15-2009, 09:43 AM   #4
monsm
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2005
Location: London, UK
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 568

Rep: Reputation: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by syg00 View Post
2.4 was stable, 2.5 was testing, 2.6 is stable
The old idea was dropped after some discussion with 2.6 - Linus hasn't (really) decided what will happen in future.
Yes thats right. I came across an email chain on kerneltrap.org when looking for this not long ago. Linus made this reply on that thread:

Quote:
I'm not going back to the old model. The new model is so much better that it's not even worth entertaining as a theory to go back.

That said, I _am_ considering changing just the numbering. Not to go back to the old model, but because a constantly increasing minor number leads to big numbers. I'm not all that thrilled with "26" as a number: it's hard to remember.

So I would not dismiss (and have been thinking about starting) talk about a simple numbering reset (perhaps yearly), but the old model of 3-year developement trees is simply not coming back as far as I'm concerned.

In fact, I think the time-based releases (ie the "2 weeks of merge window until -rc1, followed by roughly two months of stabilization") has been so successful that I'd prefer to skip the version numbering model too. We don't do releases based on "features" any more, so why should we do version _numbering_ based on "features"?

For example, I don't see any individual feature that would merit a jump
from 2.x to 3.x or even from 2.6.x to 2.8.x. So maybe those version jumps should be done by a time-based model too - matching how we actually do releases anyway.

So if the version were to be date-based, instead of releasing 2.6.26,
maybe we could have 2008.7 instead. Or just increment the major version
every decade, the middle version every year, and the minor version every time we make a release. Whatever.

But three-year development trees with a concurrent stable tree? Nope. Not going to happen.

Linus
So there you are. No decision on this yet, but I guess it will change eventually. I think its reasonably certian it won't be a 2.7, or a new stable 2.8.

Mons
 
Old 05-15-2009, 10:05 AM   #5
nilathinesh
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Distribution: Fedora 7 & 9, Ubuntu
Posts: 41

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
thanks all for clarifying !

but for the point (1)., when i insert a module in a kernel of different version it just says

Code:
# insmod *.ko
bridgedriver: disagrees about version of symbol struct_module
bridgedriver: disagrees about version of symbol struct_module
insmod: cannot insert 'bridgedriver.ko': invalid module format
also i am not sure.. for compiling this ".ko", which version of kernel is used...

so is there any way to identify the ".ko" is for X.X.X version of kernel!

thanks again.
 
Old 05-28-2009, 06:09 AM   #6
nilathinesh
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Distribution: Fedora 7 & 9, Ubuntu
Posts: 41

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
i got the version number of the kernel in which the .KO is built through chrism01.

Thanks chrism01

refer:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...or-not-728790/
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Windows: Which program can track the reg updates at software install and make a reg? frenchn00b General 5 11-20-2008 04:26 PM
take out number after kernel version pauledwards03 Linux - Kernel 5 09-18-2008 09:30 AM
what's the version number of kernel for FC5 release? xqkp77 Fedora 2 07-25-2007 11:30 AM
has any one got a user name and reg number for software pfconfig safcftm General 1 11-16-2006 07:10 AM
Nice surprise Kaffeine plays Reg 1 and Reg 2 disks 1kyle Suse/Novell 1 10-10-2005 04:47 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:33 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration