Package kernel-ide-2.4.26-i486-1.tgz in the changelog today contains a bad kernel! It is a kernel 2.4.22, not a 2.4.26. I've sent emails to slackware to get them to fix this, but it will be up on mirrors for a while after they do. This will mess up your system, prevent use of any of the modules, and thus block network traffic. You'll have to boot with a rescue disk to fix it. Here's some details:

$ md5sum kernel-ide-2.4.26-i486-1.tgz
5cd67087eb32bcc1d530d144e7e1e308 *kernel-ide-2.4.26-i486-1.tgz

$ strings boot/vmlinuz-ide-2.4.26 | grep 2.4
2.4.22 (root@midas) #6 Tue Sep 2 17:43:01 PDT 2003
`2;4
,2Z4L0vNG
;J254
dFu2 4 Y


This is a 2.4.22 kernel from last September! The config file is also an old config file. I assume the System.Map is as well. In short, don't use it! If you want a new kernel, get the one from patches/kernels/bare.i. Not this one. It will break your system!

Joel Ebel

I was under the impression that most slackers compiled their own kernel from source anyway.

Doh!! Too late. This will be a fun one to fix.

raybon

While that may or may not be true, there are definitely those who use the packaged kernel. I for one use the stock kernel unless I have a specific need to recompile. In a server environment where I need stability above anything, compiling my own kernels becomes generally too risky. Regardless of how many people compile their own kernels, I felt it would be a worthwhile warning if anyone was so inclined to use this package.

Joel

I had this installed as well... and no modules were loaded etc etc.. no network no nothing... kernel 2.4.22 :-(

fortunately (although I had to attach a keyboard and monitor to my server) I used swaret to upgrade to 2.4.24 a while ago and didn't clean up de /var/swaret.

So I booted (no need for a rescue disk) and logged in as root :

cd /var/swaret

upgradepkg kernel-ide-2.4.24 kernel-headers-2.4.24 kernel-source-2.4.24 and kernel-modules-2.4.24

after that... a reboot and everything was working again

do the same with alsa-driver-0.9.8-i486-2.tgz or otherwise you won't have sound

BTW.. anybody know anything about the kernel-headers ? Should or should you not have them installed and if you do, should you upgrade when you upgrade the kernel or should you leave the one that glibc is compiled against? That's always been confusing to me.

Pat has updated the package, so there's a -2 out now. It might take a while to make it out to mirrors, but this one should be ok.

Joel

Weird i install 2.4.26 tgz when was release, i didn't loose nothing except my sound cause you had to upgrade alsa too, so i upgrade alsa-drivers to 1.0.4 or something like that , load snd whit modprobe, do a alsaconf detect my sound card and everything is working fine. :/ but if you say that pkg 2.4.26.1.tgz is kernel 2.4.22 why they haven't fixed this? or when do they put the 2.4.26.2.tgz out?

I am having no problems with my custom 2.6.5 kernel

been using the 2.4.26 tgz, no problems, uname -r says it's a 2.4.26

Does this problem affect tgz package of current too?? i install kernel 2.4.26.1.tgz of current under my slack 9.1 like 4 weeks ago. Or this problem only affect the tgz package 2.4.26 of slack 9.1? cause i saw the security advisory today, and they only say the mistake was for slack 9.1 package they don't say nothing about current package. in fact the new kernel 2.4.26 of current that they give is the same one i installed 4 weeks ago. i even using alsa 1.0.4.2 drivers whit the new kernel, but does this mistake affect current kernel too? if it does, why they give the same current tgz package that i installed 4 weeks ago? and why uname -r say kernel 2.4.26 version. How do i know if i had the old 2.4.22 or the 2.4.26?

I don't compile my own kernel, cause it works so dam slow under my box, and doesn't boot up the modules i told him to do.

It was the 2.4.26 version of the kernel that swaret found as an update this morning.

I think I'll build the 2.6.5 kernel now to fix it.

raybon

Right. The problem was only with the package under the 9.1 patches. The kernel in /current from several weeks ago was ok, although I haven't compared the new 9.1 kernel to that one. There may still be minor differences.

Joel

well if only affect kernel from 9.1 i don't had to upgrade my current kernel to the slack 9.1 version. I put a lot of current apps under my slack 9.1 to make it more upgrade, sometimes i have to modify some conf files and path for difference between current and slack 9.1 but are less problem. :P thanks for the reply.