LinuxQuestions.org
Go Job Hunting at the LQ Job Marketplace
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 06-27-2012, 05:03 AM   #1
supermaximus79
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Apr 2012
Posts: 3

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Why doesn't slackware 14 include linux kernel 3.4.x?


Why doesn't slackware 14 include linux kernel 3.4.x?
The problem is that i have video card amd radeon HD 7750 and native amd drivers with catalist 12.6 beta don't work with xorg 7.7 at all. I red that kernel 3.4.x does have support for radeon hd 77xx series video cards. So it'll be nice to include linux kernel 3.4.x to Slackware 14 distribution, because right now i can't work properly.

Thanks a lot.
Max
 
Old 06-27-2012, 05:43 AM   #2
Didier Spaier
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Paris, France
Distribution: Slackware{,64}-{14.1,current} on a Lenovo Thinkpad T61 6457-4XG
Posts: 4,171

Rep: Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014
As stated in another thread (by AlienBob IIRC) this is because the choice was made to install a kernel which will benefit of a long term support.

But it is always possible to install a newer kernel, taking as a basis one of the config files provided in Slackware and running "make oldconfig".

It's even possible that Slackware 14 will ship with a config file for a newer kernel in /testing.

Now for components of the X stack they are easy to upgrade using the Slackbuilds provided in /source.
 
Old 06-27-2012, 07:10 AM   #3
zerouno
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2009
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 256

Rep: Reputation: 69
From the slackware 13.37 announcement:
Quote:
Slackware 13.37 uses the 2.6.37.6 Linux kernel, and also ships with 2.6.38.4 kernels for those who want to run the latest (and also includes configuration files for 2.6.35.12 and 2.6.39-rc4).
maybe a solution: 3.2 in slackware/, 3.4 in extra/ and a configuration file for 3.5-rc4
 
Old 06-27-2012, 07:21 AM   #4
Didier Spaier
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Paris, France
Distribution: Slackware{,64}-{14.1,current} on a Lenovo Thinkpad T61 6457-4XG
Posts: 4,171

Rep: Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014
I very much doubt that Pat be eager to include a config file for a RC, even in /testing
 
Old 06-27-2012, 07:25 AM   #5
onebuck
Moderator
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest USA, Central Illinois
Distribution: SlackwareŽ
Posts: 11,122
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1404Reputation: 1404Reputation: 1404Reputation: 1404Reputation: 1404Reputation: 1404Reputation: 1404Reputation: 1404Reputation: 1404Reputation: 1404
Member Response

Hi,

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerouno View Post
From the slackware 13.37 announcement:

maybe a solution: 3.2 in slackware/, 3.4 in extra/ and a configuration file for 3.5-rc4
From -current changelog;
Code:
Mon Jun 25 05:17:48 UTC 2012
.
.
.
a/kernel-huge-3.2.21-i486-1.txz:  Upgraded.
There should not be a problem with grabbing a new kernel then using the '.config' from 3.2.
 
Old 06-27-2012, 07:30 AM   #6
GazL
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Posts: 3,368

Rep: Reputation: 906Reputation: 906Reputation: 906Reputation: 906Reputation: 906Reputation: 906Reputation: 906Reputation: 906
The nature of upstream development means that whatever kernel Pat ships, it's going to be obsolete before very long. The simple truth is that you will want to update your own kernel during the lifetime of a slackware release. By shipping against the latest long-term branch by default Pat allows people the choice of either following the longterm branch updates, or chasing the bleeding edge of mainline kernel development.

IMO it's the correct choice.
 
Old 06-27-2012, 07:40 AM   #7
Didier Spaier
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Paris, France
Distribution: Slackware{,64}-{14.1,current} on a Lenovo Thinkpad T61 6457-4XG
Posts: 4,171

Rep: Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014Reputation: 1014
@Gazl

Agreed. And the process of compiling a newer kernel is facilitated by another smart decision (IMHO) which is to ship unpatched kernels as much as possible.

Last edited by Didier Spaier; 06-27-2012 at 07:42 AM.
 
Old 06-27-2012, 08:33 AM   #8
catkin
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Location: Tamil Nadu, India
Distribution: Servers: Debian Squeeze and Wheezy. Desktop: Slackware64 14.0. Netbook: Slackware 13.37
Posts: 8,533
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176
Quote:
Originally Posted by GazL View Post
The simple truth is that you will want to update your own kernel during the lifetime of a slackware release.
I've had to do it for hardware support but have not otherwise wanted to. Am I missing something?
 
Old 06-27-2012, 09:13 AM   #9
GazL
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Posts: 3,368

Rep: Reputation: 906Reputation: 906Reputation: 906Reputation: 906Reputation: 906Reputation: 906Reputation: 906Reputation: 906
Quote:
Originally Posted by catkin View Post
I've had to do it for hardware support but have not otherwise wanted to. Am I missing something?
Ignoring the 14 months of general progress, there's also 14 months of security and reliability fixes.

Have a read of: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...-vulns-399624/ If you still feel like 2.6.37.6 is a safe choice at this point, then you're a braver man than I am.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-27-2012, 09:32 AM   #10
ruario
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2011
Location: Oslo, Norway
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,813

Rep: Reputation: 817Reputation: 817Reputation: 817Reputation: 817Reputation: 817Reputation: 817Reputation: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by GazL View Post
Ignoring the 14 months of general progress, there's also 14 months of security and reliability fixes.

Have a read of: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...-vulns-399624/ If you still feel like 2.6.37.6 is a safe choice at this point, then you're a braver man than I am.
Thanks for that. I read the thread and still feel safe. There are only 3 issue that affect 2.6.37.6 and none of them are critical:

http://secunia.com/advisories/43496/
http://secunia.com/advisories/43522/
http://secunia.com/advisories/43594/
 
Old 06-27-2012, 09:40 AM   #11
audriusk
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Klaipėda, Lithuania
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 240

Rep: Reputation: 105Reputation: 105
Don't forget that Slackware is used on servers, where stable and well-supported system is wanted, so sticking to LTS kernel makes a lot of sense in this kind of environment.
 
Old 06-27-2012, 09:47 AM   #12
catkin
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Location: Tamil Nadu, India
Distribution: Servers: Debian Squeeze and Wheezy. Desktop: Slackware64 14.0. Netbook: Slackware 13.37
Posts: 8,533
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176Reputation: 1176
Quote:
Originally Posted by GazL View Post
Ignoring the 14 months of general progress, there's also 14 months of security and reliability fixes.

Have a read of: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...-vulns-399624/ If you still feel like 2.6.37.6 is a safe choice at this point, then you're a braver man than I am.
Thanks GazL and ruario

For a personal computer it seems safe and stable enough -- balancing the small risk of disruption against the certainty of time required to change the kernel and the larger risk of complicating disaster recovery with a non-standard kernel.
 
Old 06-27-2012, 09:59 AM   #13
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
Just compile your own.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-27-2012, 03:16 PM   #14
zerouno
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2009
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 256

Rep: Reputation: 69
Why slackware 13.37 have 2 kernels? Also slackware 13.0 had 2 kernels.

Slackware 11.0 had a 2.4 kernel by default, for who want to use slackware for server, and a 2.6 kernel in extra/ for who want to use slackware for workstation.


Why slackware 14.0 may not have 2?

A kernel LTS as standard kernel for who want to use slackware for server, and a non-LTS in extra/ for who want to use slackware for workstation.


Note: 2.6.37 was NOT an LTS kernel!
 
Old 06-27-2012, 03:51 PM   #15
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0, CRUX 3.1
Posts: 3,013
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 760Reputation: 760Reputation: 760Reputation: 760Reputation: 760Reputation: 760Reputation: 760
Slackware 14.0 is not finalized, nor is it out yet.

-Current by design only has one kernel due to the nature that it is NOT a stable branch, but more of a developer/tester/unstable branch.

Only stable branches are allocated two kernels. The default kernel is for the main release as a long term support while the kernel included in /testing is more of what was still being tested off the main kernel.org line for just such purposes of supporting hardware that may not be supported by the default long term support kernel.
 
  


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
no /linux-2.6.32/include/asm-sh directory in kernel jvilla1983 Linux - Kernel 1 12-28-2009 01:13 AM
/usr/src/linux/include/linux/version.h doesn't exsist itz2000 Linux - Newbie 1 10-26-2007 06:43 PM
Updating kernel headers /usr/include/linux mhansen Slackware 4 11-30-2006 06:31 AM
kernel includes at /usr/src/linux/include do not match current kernel. blanny Red Hat 1 03-09-2006 07:53 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:04 PM.

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