SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Yep, I believe it matter. Because the 2.6.38.x kernels have, compared with 2.6.37.x series, a much improved DRM stack. Read: faster and better video-drivers for KDE4's jingles and bells, and even for games ...
I'm announcing the release of the 2.6.37.6 kernel.
All users of the 2.6.37 kernel series must upgrade.
No, scrap that, they should move to the 2.6.38 kernel series as the .37
series is now end-of-life and will get no more updates.
I think maybe this matters more
The 2.6.33 kernel in 13.1 wasnt an LTS kernel either IIRC.
as I see it, having the availability of fixes from upstream it's a good thing and needs less effort in maintaining.
but I'm common-sense talking, I've not a view on the matter as wide as Pat, and if he thinks it's safer to stay with 2.6.37 it's ok too, AFAIC.
BTW, I'm running a 2.6.38-zen nearly on all of my l33t hosts.
Upstream kernel longevity is always a bit of an issue for Slackware. Unlike Redhat, Pat and the team don't have the resources to back-port fixes and maintain their own stable kernel tree. So, you either have to sacrifice stability and track the upstream releases more closely, or you end up with an old end-of-lifed kernel version.
Even if Pat did ship .38, when .39 releases in a month or two's time, we'll still be in the exact same situation.
The way upstream kernel releases are managed really only seems to suit a "rolling release" approach. It's an awkward situation for Pat to deal with.
Personally, I normally track whatever the latest upstream kernel is with my own custom builds, but I usually skip the .0 and .1 versions.
I wonder if it would make sense for Pat and the team to bump the Kernel from 2.6.37.5 to 2.6.38.2 (or 2.6.38.?) before 13.37 is released ?
-- kjh
There's a lot of new stuff in 2.6.38. I think it needs a lot of shaking around, first. FYI, I have for years stuck my own kernels into Slackware systems (and much more in some cases). If you want 2.6.38, build 2.6.38, put it in whatever version you are running now, and shake it around a bit for us.
Let me tell you why it is important DRM from 2.6.38 ...
Linus is very reluctant to enter the alpha code in the main trunk of the kernel.
But the team's David Airlie, they are including the AMD and Red Hat developers, preparing DRM Next Generation. This new DRM stack, much improved, was developed and tested separately, until it was suddenly placed in 2.6.38, because it was considered stable.
Therefore, it is important that 2.6.38.
The 2.6.38 kernel, combined with Mesa 7.10.1 (or GIT), works like a dream. Everything is in Gallium, apart from Intel, and the drivers are very fast and stable. Tested on R300G, R600G, Nouveau and i915 by me.
Last edited by Darth Vader; 03-28-2011 at 11:24 AM.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
