LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/index.php)
-   Slackware (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/forumdisplay.php?f=14)
-   -   Next release? (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread.php?t=558031)

polarbear20000 05-31-2007 11:07 AM

Next release?
 
Is it too early to start a feeding frenzy by asking when Slackware 12 might be out, or can I safely ask that question and still get out alive? :D

Keeping my system tuned to the -current tree is probably not an option while on dial-up, so that is why I'm wondering. No such thing as a dumb question, right?

bsdunix 05-31-2007 11:26 AM

:twocents: for everytime that's been asked. It will be out when it's ready. If you need a more definative answer you'll have to ask Pat. :cool:

Okie 05-31-2007 11:28 AM

Slackware-12? no Slackware-11.1?

are the 2.4.xx kernels are being put out to pasture?

pdw_hu 05-31-2007 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okie
Slackware-12? no Slackware-11.1?

are the 2.4.xx kernels are being put out to pasture?

Probably they are. Read Pat's comment on this, somewhere in the current changelog. As we know him, this big change (for slackware) is probably gonna take a while longer than usual releases.

rworkman 05-31-2007 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okie
Slackware-12? no Slackware-11.1?

are the 2.4.xx kernels are being put out to pasture?

There's been no official statement on the version number of the next release.

In regards to 2.4.x kernels, they are indeed out - the next release of Slackware will have glibc-2.5, which does not support 2.4 kernels.

Jeebizz 05-31-2007 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rworkman
There's been no official statement on the version number of the next release.
I don't know about the version number, but there will be 2.6 :D

Quote:

Mon Nov 20 14:31:25 CST 2006
Thanks to everyone who provided valuable feedback on the question below. It
looks as if Slackware -current (future 12.0?) is going to charge into 2.6-only
territory, but it will be a conservative "charge". :-) The overwhelming
consensus is that the 2.6 series is now more than stable enough for production
use. Some folks expressed concern over the loss of Linux 2.4.x compatibility,
but they were a definite minority. Some suggested maintaining two -current
branches -- one following 2.4 and the other 2.6. The solution that'll be
taken concerning 2.4.x will be to make Slackware 11.0 better maintained than
simply security updates. It should see some other non-security updates as
well (perhaps the introduction of an /updates directory?), and will be a long
lived OS for those who swear by the stability of the 2.4.x kernel series.
Meanwhile, 2.4.x compatibility features (such as the, er, mess? going on in
the startup scripts) will be steadily eliminated in -current to focus on the
best possible 2.6.x support. With a lot of work, we should be able to make
the next Slackware release an excellent choice for both servers and desktops.
Again -- thanks for all the input! :-)

Okie 05-31-2007 04:31 PM

i was just curious about the kernel changes, the 2.6.xx kernels are quite nice now, i have Crux running 2.6.21.3 and it boots & runs great, just waiting for Alsa to officially release 1.0.14 get sound working in Crux, i like Crux but Slackware will always be my favorite, (Pat V. sure rolls a good distro)...

drumz 05-31-2007 05:04 PM

I forgot who mentioned it, but I read a while back in these forums that someone had made the observation that every time glibc was updated, Slackware's major version number changed (e.g. 10.2->11.0). If it wasn't, the release was a point release. Of course, this is more of a "Moore's Law" than a "law of gravity" law.

Note: I did not check the validity of this statement, I just know I read it here on LQ.

pdw_hu 06-01-2007 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okie
i was just curious about the kernel changes, the 2.6.xx kernels are quite nice now, i have Crux running 2.6.21.3 and it boots & runs great, just waiting for Alsa to officially release 1.0.14 get sound working in Crux, i like Crux but Slackware will always be my favorite, (Pat V. sure rolls a good distro)...

Alsa 1.0.14 is already commited to 2.6.22-rc3-git4 :)

Okie 06-01-2007 10:52 AM

cool! thanks for the info pdw_hu, alsa rc4 is working and i have AudoVideo now, when alsa-1.0.14 is officially released i guess it wont hurt to just install it as it will just go on top (overwrite) of rc4 :)

Lufbery 06-01-2007 12:18 PM

Regarding the 2.4 kernels, the following excerpt from the above quoted portion of the Current changelog is interesting:

Quote:

The solution that'll be taken concerning 2.4.x will be to make Slackware 11.0 better maintained than simply security updates. It should see some other non-security updates as well (perhaps the introduction of an /updates directory?), and will be a long lived OS for those who swear by the stability of the 2.4.x kernel series.
That's great. I'm running Slackware 11 with the default 2.4 kernel on my desktop computer and it's working just fine. After tweaking my fstab, I'm able to plug in and mount flash drives, DVDs and CDs just fine.

I'm not sure what the differences are between the two kernels -- I'm still trying to learn about that -- and I'm really not sure if the 2.6 kernel is more unstable than the 2.4.

I'm not sure there's a compelling reason to switch from 2.4 to 2.6 right now. Can someone shed some light on that?

Regards,

-Drew

Okie 06-01-2007 01:05 PM

there is a lot of good to be said about the 2.4.xx kernels, i have slack 10.2 with the latest 2.4 and it is just super stable and responsive in both GUI & CLI, (rock solid)...

the 2.4.xx kernels do lack features in the 2.6.xx kernels though, no udev & no HAL support to name two, but the 2.6.xx kernels if hand rolled leaving out un-necessary items does run plenty stable too, seems to be just as fast and responsive as the 2.4.xx (to me it does) i am glad the 2.6.xx kernels can be built in such as way that initrd.img wont be necessary since i hate that feature & rather have filesystem support built right in to the kernel (filesystem support built as modules need an initrd.img to load them before booting the OS)...

when Slackware-12 gets released i should have no problem using it...

davidsrsb 06-02-2007 10:57 PM

Dual core cpus are the norm now in both desktops and even laptops. I would not be shocked to see a smp kernel becoming "standard" in 12.0 or soon after.

unixfool 06-02-2007 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidsrsb
Dual core cpus are the norm now in both desktops and even laptops. I would not be shocked to see a smp kernel becoming "standard" in 12.0 or soon after.

They're the norm for new machines, but I don't think they're the most common if you factor in ALL CPUs, legacy or otherwise.

I've only one dual core machine out of eight in my house. I'm thinking most households are similar. My mom has only one dual core of three machines. My sister has only one dual core of four in her household.

Dual cores aren't yet the standard if you're factoring in ALL computers. It'll be a very long time before single core machines begin to go the way of the dodo...that time isn't upon us yet.

erklaerbaer 06-03-2007 05:29 AM

can someone shed some light on this?
Quote:

NOTE: it is probably best to use the SMP kernel even in
a single processor machine if it will run. The non-SMP kernels should
really be used only in machines that are not at least a Pentium-Pro, or
that (for some other reason) will not properly run the SMP kernel.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:00 PM.