digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Linux Kernel 2.6.22 Released [final]

kernelnewbies.org — The long awaited Linux Kernel 2.6.22 has been released!

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • stmiller, on 10/11/2007, -0/+29With improved intel mac support:

    "New Apple SMC driver (hardware monitoring and control) which provides support for the Apple System Management Controller, which provides an accelerometer (Apple Sudden Motion Sensor), light sensors, temperature sensors, keyboard backlight control and fan control. Only Intel-based Apple's computers are supported (MacBook Pro, MacBook, MacMini) "
    • trogdoor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13By the way, even before this release you could control the keyboard backlight ( works out of the Box on Fedora and Ubuntu ) and you can set the minimum fan speed with:

      echo 5999 > /sys/devices/platform/applesmc/fan0_minimum_speed
      ( as root, does the same thing as smc fan control for OSx, change the number to whatever rpm you want )

      So if anyone was going to upgrade for those reasons there is no need.
  • CyberPhoenix, on 10/11/2007, -18/+54Linux is excellent high quality software, the despots at MS could learn much from the Linux developers.
    • sbgskl, on 10/11/2007, -16/+58It'd probably blow your mind that many Microsofties run linux at home and read digg. You know what happens when people go to college and start learning about different people and different ways of doing things? You drop the holy war attitude and open your mind, and realize that Microsoft can be a great place to work with talented people. Maybe when you enter college in five years or so, you'll realize this too.
      • Malachai, on 10/11/2007, -10/+13Wow. I don't think CyberPhoenix deserved that jab.
        • stockjones, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Linux the only OS praised for being 10 years late. Not that Linux isnt nice for various uses, but where was Linux in the early 80's when Apple, Microsoft, IBM even Atari were in the thick of it in the desktop space race. Non existent. I just say this because all this Linux is the greatest OS ever bullcrap gets a bit ridiculous.
          • GMorgan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6The Bugatti Veyron is the only car praised for being 100 years late. Not that it isn't nice for various uses but where was the Veyron in the early 1900's when Ford and others were in the thick of it in the motor car space race. Non existent. I just say this because all the Veyron is the greatest car ever bullcrap gets ridiculous.
      • PatrickBrown, on 10/11/2007, -7/+25Really? I heard that when you go to college you just get a condescending asshole attitude.
        • greyfade, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Bah, that's just a myth, you simple-minded high school dropout. I went to college and it didn't make me the least bit condescending, you insensitive clod.
      • CyberPhoenix, on 10/11/2007, -12/+8If there are talented people working at MS, their products are not benefiting from that talent.
        • aaronm67, on 10/11/2007, -4/+9There are plenty of talented people at Microsoft, and their products are very definitely benefiting from that talent.

          Have you seen Office 2007? It's a huge improvement over 2003, and by far the best office app there is.

          Also, have you actually used Vista? It is very stable, and handles application crashes much better then XP. Right now the biggest problem in Vista is drivers, which are far more of a problem in Linux.

          I generally prefer Linux, mainly because I think Amarok is the best music player there is by far, and I love how it stores my collection in a SQL database, and I really like a lot of the applications in KDE. But, you can't deny that Microsoft makes some excellent products, and have a very talented development team.
          • stmiller, on 10/11/2007, -7/+5Wow, how much is MS paying people to post pro-MS stuff all over blogs and such? Or do they just give you free software as the deal? And to claim that Vista has more driver support than Linux- that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read.
        • CyberPhoenix, on 10/11/2007, -5/+9Office 2007 the best office app there is? LOL! MS Office is expensive, has a nasty EULA and lacks basic ODF support, OpenOffice is obviously the superior choice.
          http://why.openoffice.org/
          Vista is stable? Maybe, until it invalidates your "key".
          http://fourteenapart.com/microsoft-invalidates-my-key/
        • aaronm67, on 10/11/2007, -9/+4Are you kidding? MS Office costs less then $150. If you can't afford to pay $150 for software you'll use as much as Office then you need a different job. And...yes...it lacks basic ODF support because nobody gives two ***** about ODF.

          I haven't read the EULA, so I don't know how nasty it is. But, nobody else has read the EULA either, so nobody else knows or cares how nasty it is either.

          As far as the OpenOffice comparison, there really isn't any. I would post a dozen links to comparisons coming out in favor of MSOffice. But, take a look at the feature set for Excel and compare it to Calc, ignoring all the benchmarks.

          As far as the invalid key goes...it happens occassionally. A 5 minute call to the MS support will activate your key.
        • daftman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5@aaronm67
          May be that's your problem: never bothered to read the EULA so you never realize how Microsoft software own you instead of other way around. When you actually run a business instead of pirating WIndows software to use for your school project, you would then take the time out to read how a software license would affect your business. Until then ignorant is bliss.

          > And...yes...it lacks basic ODF support because nobody gives two ***** about ODF.
          Actually a lot of people "give a two *****" about ODF because its actually an open standard. But judging from your tone, you are too young to understand the important of open format thus educating you would be a waste of time.
        • CyberPhoenix, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6People should care about ODF support, vedor lock-in is bad, interoperability is good. Most people don't need the extra features in MS Office, OpenOffice will easily do the job for the majority of people. Absusive EULA's should not be overlooked, and "validation" is a ridiculous and unnecessary waste of time.
          http://www.mypcpros.com/computer-blog/2007/5/1/microsofts-new-validation-policy.html
          http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=142
        • aaronm67, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3I sent an e-mail with a .ods or .odf, I would get at least half a dozen e-mails back asking me how to open the file. Yes, I know it's an open standard, but my point is that nobody actually uses it, so it really doesn't matter.

          You're right, I don't own my own business. I do work from home, though. And I can guarantee, even if I did own my business, I wouldn't take the time to read software licenses. I have better things to do with my time, and if the license is good enough for 99% of the business world, it's just fine for me.
      • Fartag, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5"You know what happens when people go to college and start learning about different people and different ways of doing things? You drop the holy war attitude and open your mind"

        Well, hopefully by the time you go to college you'll learn that there are more OSes than the one you're currently running (generally Windows if you don't yet realize the benefits of switching). Maybe you'll also learn the truth about the anticompetitive practices that Microsoft has engaged in for many years and how their tactics up to present day has hurt the computing field.

        You should definitely be able to distinguish between a "holy war" versus rallying behind basic software freedoms, and know that Microsoft has always been staunchly against them and OSS producers for them. Finally, for bonus points you'll understand that if you seek to improve humanity instead of to control it for profit that Microsoft is not and never has been the company with the best track record. But, perhaps you can change the company from the inside? Otherwise OSS and associated open research might be more your style.
        • LogicalMind, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9I pretty much agree with what you said, but there are a few points. One, linux is not hurt by microsoft's anti-competitive practices. Microsoft's anti-competitive practices usually involve making a software item free to force the other company make their competing software item free as well. The competing company usually only has one product and suffers from this. See netscape. An anti-competitive act against linux would be microsoft making their OS free. But it isn't free and many more people are still willing to pay for windows than use free linux. Thanks to great microsoft marketing.

          If you are from the US, we are based on a capitalist ideology. The whole purpose of having a business is to make money. That is microsoft's only goal. Whether you believe that to be good or bad, that is the truth. Any linux company is the same way. They are all trying to find a way to make money off of selling some kind of business having to do with linux. If you don't make money you aren't a business for very long. If you don't want to prioritize making money then you don't form a business, sort of like GNU.

          Unless you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth you don't have many options except working for a business to make money.
        • Fartag, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@LogicalMind (sorry the reply button has disappeared for me for your comment!)

          "linux is not hurt by microsoft's anti-competitive practices"

          This is true in the sense that it gains strength from it (stream of fed up computer users flocking from Windows, and from those that like and/or benefit from the "software freedoms" on the other side) but it's held back by it in other ways as well. For example, less hardware vendor support, fewer commercial 3rd party apps native to it, (etc.) which come along with the territory if a major company like Microsoft is the prime developmental target. But the anticompetitive part to use nasty tricks that a monopoly should not use when in such a position of power causes people to get to p.o.'d and not just merely fed up.

          In that category you've got vendor deals to keep certain specs/APIs/fundamental protocols and formats in the dark, you have intercompatibility "issues" to ensure only your products can reliably work together with it, you may pay vendors to exclude support for other platforms, or take up standards extend them with proprietary extensions to gain whatever users of the source through a monopoly position to kill the true initial developers of it. You can try to implement alternate and closed protocols for very fundamental things. There's also slinging patent and "IP" FUD to turn prospective buyers of OSS support or other things.

          I love to see companies profit over inventing things that are useful. They do good when we (humans, world, whatever) do good. But there seems to be no value (except to their workers and shareholders) of a company doing harm as an anticompetitive monopoly for further exclusion and profit. Especially when they may control high percentage with something so fundamental as an OS.

          Also, there are also many ways to earn money with OSS, treating software as an individual product to be sold and legal/DRM protected was fortunately not the final evolutionary step in information related business.
      • daftman, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3After going to "college", I can tell you the holy war attitude happens regardless of whether you are in college or not. It's a philosophical and political debate, not an informational debate. So learning more things doesn't help. Alot of my friends who worked at Microsoft wish they are at Google. It is true that you are working with talented people but when management and attitude sucks, no talent is going to make the work place better.
        Nobody here hates Microsoft developers as nobody hates developers of any company. They just hate the management. May be if you actually understand that, it would save you from making a dumb point next time.
      • yenster, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"...realize that Microsoft can be a great place to work with talented people."

        Try telling that to a friend of mine who had a 10+ year career with Microsoft here in the U.S. as a highly paid network engineer and had his job outsourced to India last year.
    • TKn00b, on 10/11/2007, -26/+6I don't mean to sound like a MS fanboy, but after using both OSes for years I think that Linux developers could learn a lot more from MS developers.
      • Amablue, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Out of curiosity, what? (I havn't dugg you down, I just want to know what you think)
      • Fritzel, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I'm also curious here, the only thing I can honestly think of is marketing, which doesn't have anything to do with development. And I actually dugg you up, I think this is worth some exposure
      • stephenwq, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2To some extent they can learn from each other. Despite major marketing pushes and ties with companies to get releases windows out there, theres more than that for the reason why it is so successful. Maybe it's user friendliness, i can't tell, as i find both incredibly easy to use. Maybe it is marketing, and Dell's Ubuntu deal will be a good push.
      • leksdraven, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I dugg you down because of ONE KEYWORD: "more."

        Truth is, we all can learn from each other. That IS part of the spirit of "Open Source," after all.
      • CyberPhoenix, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5The MS developers could teach the Linux developers to infect the OS with DRM and activation, give the OS ludicrous system requirements, turn the OS into a bloated mess, and help them write a horrid EULA.
        • XVampireX, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2True thing :)
          • juraj, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Well, not defending microsoft or anything, but I doubt a coder in microsoft had something to do with EULAs.
      • xst4t1kx, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Good job backing up that argument with... nothing.
    • xst4t1kx, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2@sbgski: Thanks for you incredibly ignorant opinion.
      • UNEXPLODEDduck, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Thanks for not using the reply button.
  • Dankoozy, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1damn. only installed 21.5 a few days ago. ah well this is how it goes.

    i wish I had a MBP to install it on
  • neosublime, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5I'm installing it on my MBP right now... (fingers crossed)
  • Roger, on 10/11/2007, -24/+2OMG!!!11!
    • LordofShadows, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1/me wonders what majors changes will be in linux 2.7
  • Mohdoo, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18Is a Linux Kernal something upgradable? Or does it have to be installed with it? Sorry for noob question!
    • ApeInago, on 10/11/2007, -1/+25you can upgrade it, but it takes some magic.

      if you are good, you can upgrade it without restarting... but for that you need to flick the switch to more magic.
      • jbhannah, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6No magic, really. If you're using a "boxed" distro (Fedora/Ubuntu/openSUSE/Mandriva) it'll upgrade it for you in its regular software updates. If you use a roll-your-own or manual-maintenance distro (Gentoo/Slackware) you can just download the code, then make menuconfig; make; make install.

        I should write a kernel compiling tutorial, I haven't seen a good one that's been updated since the 2.2 days....
    • K3ITHK, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10You can update the kernel.
    • CyberGlitch, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1What distro are you using? It depends.
    • corteze, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11I hate the word KERNAL, you commodore freak....
    • nixfu, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Yes its easy. Usually its a simple matter of installing the new kernel.

      It does not 'take effect' of course until you reboot into that kernel, since the kernel is only read during bootup.

      Most distros will just add the new version to the boot menu, and/or make it the new default one for future boots.

    • nathanwalker, on 10/11/2007, -10/+1Sounds like you aren't even too sure what the kernal is. The linux kernal is the basis of the linux operating system, and can be upgraded without a reinstall, but yeah, it takes magic to get it done without crashing...
    • schoate09, on 10/11/2007, -13/+2RTFM FTW!
  • redlemon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+34SWEET!! now i can break my broadcom wireless card again!!!
  • jonahan52, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Site's down hope it wasn't using the new kernel...
  • limaunion, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I'm already running 2.6.22 + CFS-V19, no problems as usual. Does anyone one if libata is safe enough in order to use it instead of the old IDE drivers ? I've an nforce2 mainboard with two PATA hard disks and am not sure about switching to this new driver.
    • bjweeks, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Yes, it works fine...
    • greyfade, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1how is CFS v19? I haven't followed LKML at all, so I don't even know if it's in -mm yet. I know Ingo wants it in .23...
      /ck user
  • ahvi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+18new wireless stack w00t!
    • GMorgan, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5That stack is already in Ubuntu and Fedora and yes, it is nice to have a decent generic wireless stack. Should see more drivers now.
  • neko, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I'll upgrade when I'm good and ready! (When it gets into Debian testing.. ;)
  • Chuckinator, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11From Linus:

    "Woo-hoo. I'm sure somebody will report a "this doesn't compile, and
    I have a new root exploit" five minutes after release, but it still
    feels good ;)"
  • BarryAndBonnie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Too bad this will be the last kernel to have a ck patchset.
    • greyfade, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Well, you could always resync it yourself until CFS gets better...
  • spiffytech, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2All sysadmins at NCSU and other universities that use AFS will be glad to see even basic support built into the kernel now. Boy, is that stuff a pain...
  • bruenig, on 10/11/2007, -3/+22Don't you mean the Ubuntu Linux Kernel?
    /sarcasm
  • jrsims, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Anyone notice the added support for the Atari keyboard and mouse?
  • maz2331, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0It installed!!!! Woo Hoo!!!
  • unsolicited, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1http://lxr.linux.no/source/
  • tytanium0503, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Damn, I can't wait for 2.6.23 to be released!
  • nc6800, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0it's down and google does not have cache yet.
  • stiletto120, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Coral Cache has it: http://kernelnewbies.org.nyud.net:8080/Linux_2_6_22
  • stiletto120, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0Coral Cache has it: http://kernelnewbies.org.nyud.net:8080/Linux_2_6_22
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.