PDA

View Full Version : Misc. questions about the linux kernel...



YourSurrogateGod
September 4th, 2005, 08:25 PM
What's the next version after 2.6?

Has anyone read this (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0672327201/qid=1125861150/sr=1-3/ref=sr_1_3/103-3433925-3331801?v=glance&s=books) this book, any comments or thoughts about it?

KingBahamut
September 4th, 2005, 08:29 PM
A book published by Novell about the Linux Kernel.

um no...I havent , dont think I will.

If you want to understand the inner workings of the 2.6 kernel, you need to read the many writings of Andrew Morton. I believe, I even have an MP3 of a speech he gave in which he entailed exactly where 2.6 kernel was going and how it was going to get there.


As far as next version release.

2.7.1 , logical of course.......

YourSurrogateGod
September 4th, 2005, 08:33 PM
A book published by Novell about the Linux Kernel.

um no...I havent , dont think I will.

If you want to understand the inner workings of the 2.6 kernel, you need to read the many writings of Andrew Morton. I believe, I even have an MP3 of a speech he gave in which he entailed exactly where 2.6 kernel was going and how it was going to get there.
Thanks, I'll look him up as well. The reviews seem quite positive for that book, so it seems decent.

As far as next version release.

2.7.1 , logical of course.......
Wasn't the previous kernel 2.4? Seemed like an odd jump from 2.4 to 2.6 without the 2.5.

KingBahamut
September 4th, 2005, 08:36 PM
Faulty Logic.

2.8.1

Wheres my head?

YourSurrogateGod
September 4th, 2005, 08:45 PM
Faulty Logic.

2.8.1

Wheres my head?
The numbering is still weird... why leave the odd numbers out?

Ubunted
September 4th, 2005, 08:52 PM
Because odd-numbered kernels denote unstable cutting-edge versions used for technology testing. Good code comes out of that and goes into the next even-numbered kernel.

Personally I'm curious as to why I've heard absolutely nothing about 2.7 or 2.8 development yet.

YourSurrogateGod
September 4th, 2005, 08:57 PM
Because odd-numbered kernels denote unstable cutting-edge versions used for technology testing. Good code comes out of that and goes into the next even-numbered kernel.
Ooooohhhh.....

Personally I'm curious as to why I've heard absolutely nothing about 2.7 or 2.8 development yet.
Now that you mention it...

poofyhairguy
September 5th, 2005, 01:35 AM
Because odd-numbered kernels denote unstable cutting-edge versions used for technology testing. Good code comes out of that and goes into the next even-numbered kernel.

Personally I'm curious as to why I've heard absolutely nothing about 2.7 or 2.8 development yet.

Because the development model has been changing recently.

matthew
September 5th, 2005, 02:18 AM
The model is changing, so this info won't be accurate for long, but you can find info on kernel numbering (Section 1, question 2) and tons of other stuff here:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/docs/lkml/#s1

RastaMahata
September 5th, 2005, 02:36 AM
edit: Dumb answer. Sorry :(

YourSurrogateGod
September 5th, 2005, 03:06 AM
Because the development model has been changing recently.
In what ways is it changing?

YourSurrogateGod
September 5th, 2005, 03:07 AM
The model is changing, so this info won't be accurate for long, but you can find info on kernel numbering (Section 1, question 2) and tons of other stuff here:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/docs/lkml/#s1
Thanks...

poofyhairguy
September 5th, 2005, 03:23 AM
http://kerneltrap.org/node/5500