[arch-general] kernel26 2.6.25-1 enters [testing]
The new 2.6.25 kernel and most of the external modules are in [testing]. Changes: - Complete configuration overhaul - Removed phc patch - Removed mactel patch The removal of these patches was because a) there are no new patches available for 2.6.25 and b) I am trying to reduce the amount of patching, especially if it only benefits a few people or can be potentially dangerous. If there are any problems due to the configuration changes or new kernel bugs, please let me know. If you want to know more about the real changes, read here: http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_25 I didn't update any modules, so if there are new versions available for any, please inform their maintainers. The following modules are currently broken. I didn't do any research on those yet, so if anyone knows something, please let me know. - atl2 (Simo, could you have a look, you must probably update it) - catalyst - martian - openswan-klips - slmodem (USB symbols are now GPL only, this driver will never work again unless it's rewritten in userspace - is this only a USB driver or also a PCI driver?) I wish you all happy testing.
On Samstag, 19. April 2008 18:30 Thomas Bächler wrote:
I didn't update any modules, so if there are new versions available for any, please inform their maintainers. The following modules are currently broken. I didn't do any research on those yet, so if anyone knows something, please let me know.
I have to use nvida 173.08 (as suggested on the heise newsticker) because the compile of the kernelmodul with nvidia 169.12 fails. Perhaps the arch nvidia packages have a fix included so see this more as an info.
I wish you all happy testing.
At the moment i can say that my minimal things as Sound and USB Stick mounting works as before. See you, Attila
Attila schrieb:
I didn't update any modules, so if there are new versions available for any, please inform their maintainers. The following modules are currently broken. I didn't do any research on those yet, so if anyone knows something, please let me know.
I think you misunderstood me, I only said I didn't do any updates on the external module packages. I did however rebuild the ones that compiled against 2.6.25.
I have to use nvida 173.08 (as suggested on the heise newsticker) because the compile of the kernelmodul with nvidia 169.12 fails. Perhaps the arch nvidia packages have a fix included so see this more as an info.
The fix has been available for a long time: http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=110088 However, there seem to be problems with nvidia, according to Pierre. I didn't notice anything, but then I only started kdm, didn't even log in.
I wish you all happy testing.
At the moment i can say that my minimal things as Sound and USB Stick mounting works as before.
Good.
On Sonntag, 20. April 2008 12:30 Thomas Bächler wrote:
I think you misunderstood me, I only said I didn't do any updates on the external module packages. I did however rebuild the ones that compiled against 2.6.25.
My error, i took only the section to quote and not to say that the modules won't works.
The fix has been available for a long time: http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=110088
Thanks for the info. I don't test 2.6.25-rc* so this is the first time that i need it.
However, there seem to be problems with nvidia, according to Pierre. I didn't notice anything, but then I only started kdm, didn't even log in.
173.08 works and glxgears has nice speed but there is no /dev/nvidiactl and "direct rendering: No" ... hmm, i do a /etc/start_udev because i change my rules for usbsticks ... i will reboot and inform you if there is a poblem. See you, Attila
On Sonntag, 20. April 2008 12:30 Thomas Bächler wrote:
However, there seem to be problems with nvidia, according to Pierre. I didn't notice anything, but then I only started kdm, didn't even log in.
Okay, now i can say that nvidia 173.08 works and it seems that if you run /etc/start_udev the /dev/nvdia* devices get killed. I recognized that my superkaramba theme shows me about 10 Grad Celsius more with kernel26 2.6.25 than with my own kernel package 2.6.24.5 but this is again only an information and a will search for the reason by msyself. Only for the stats: I load w83627ehf and coretemp. See you, Attila
On Sonntag, 20. April 2008 13:42 Attila wrote: Sorry for commenting myself and see this please only as an information.
Okay, now i can say that nvidia 173.08 works and it seems that if you run /etc/start_udev the /dev/nvdia* devices get killed.
I step back to a patched 169.12 because i have some seldom redraw problems with 173.08.
I recognized that my superkaramba theme shows me about 10 Grad Celsius more with kernel26 2.6.25 than with my own kernel package 2.6.24.5 but this is again only an information and a will search for the reason by msyself. Only for the stats: I load w83627ehf and coretemp.
For everybody else who see higher temperatures with a core2duo you be not alone: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/18/190 http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-684812-highlight-.html See you, Attila
On Saturday 19 April 2008, Thomas Bächler wrote:
- Removed mactel patch
The removal of these patches was because a) there are no new patches available for 2.6.25 and b) I am trying to reduce the amount of patching, especially if it only benefits a few people or can be potentially dangerous.
As far as I know, the mactel patch is required for some hardware support on intel-based mac systems and contains important fixes. This does not seem like one patch too many, but an essential one for all users who, like me, have mac hardware. I do understand your wish to reduce the number of patches, but throwing out patches required for support of important hardware does not seem the way to go to me. Regards, Erwin
Erwin Van de Velde schrieb:
As far as I know, the mactel patch is required for some hardware support on intel-based mac systems and contains important fixes. This does not seem like one patch too many, but an essential one for all users who, like me, have mac hardware.
Wouldn't you think that those "important fixes" would be merged upstream by now? The patch has been around for over a year, and frankly I don't see why we should keep maintaining patches if the authors are incapable of submitting them upstream.
I do understand your wish to reduce the number of patches, but throwing out patches required for support of important hardware does not seem the way to go to me.
We'll see. So far nobody complained.
Le Sunday 20 April 2008 15:23:38 Erwin Van de Velde, vous avez écrit :
On Saturday 19 April 2008, Thomas Bächler wrote:
- Removed mactel patch
The removal of these patches was because a) there are no new patches available for 2.6.25 and b) I am trying to reduce the amount of patching, especially if it only benefits a few people or can be potentially dangerous.
As far as I know, the mactel patch is required for some hardware support on intel-based mac systems and contains important fixes. This does not seem like one patch too many, but an essential one for all users who, like me, have mac hardware. I do understand your wish to reduce the number of patches, but throwing out patches required for support of important hardware does not seem the way to go to me.
Regards, Erwin
I also am using arch on my mac, and I find this essential and should not be removed if you find 2.6.25 compatible patchs (I am sure that they will come out in not so many time) Arnaud
Dream Team schrieb:
I also am using arch on my mac, and I find this essential and should not be removed if you find 2.6.25 compatible patchs (I am sure that they will come out in not so many time)
You see, that's my problem, they may come out sometime. On the mactel mailing lists, there is no mention of 2.6.25, there is virtually no traffic at all. There is no git tree that is kept in sync with current linux development, only a SVN dir where some random patches are lying around. 2.6.25 has been released, there is no update, no "we will update soon", nothing. The project seems practically dead from the outside - and I will not be held up by such things any more. When there is no updated patch for something inside the -ARCH kernel, it is dropped. New patches are only added if they fix bugs, no new features.
Dream Team wrote:
Le Sunday 20 April 2008 15:23:38 Erwin Van de Velde, vous avez écrit :
- Removed mactel patch
The removal of these patches was because a) there are no new patches available for 2.6.25 and b) I am trying to reduce the amount of patching, especially if it only benefits a few people or can be potentially dangerous. As far as I know, the mactel patch is required for some hardware support on intel-based mac systems and contains important fixes. This does not seem
On Saturday 19 April 2008, Thomas Bächler wrote: like one patch too many, but an essential one for all users who, like me, have mac hardware. I do understand your wish to reduce the number of patches, but throwing out patches required for support of important hardware does not seem the way to go to me.
Regards, Erwin
I also am using arch on my mac, and I find this essential and should not be removed if you find 2.6.25 compatible patchs (I am sure that they will come out in not so many time)
Arnaud
Hi, I would suggest to test the new kernel on your mac before complaining, perhaps it supports it better now. And if after that much time this patch is necessary for such common hardware and hasn't been imported upstream, I think you should contact the LKML. Dimitris
Le Sunday 20 April 2008 19:07:11 Dimitrios Apostolou, vous avez écrit :
Dream Team wrote:
Le Sunday 20 April 2008 15:23:38 Erwin Van de Velde, vous avez écrit :
On Saturday 19 April 2008, Thomas Bächler wrote:
- Removed mactel patch
The removal of these patches was because a) there are no new patches available for 2.6.25 and b) I am trying to reduce the amount of patching, especially if it only benefits a few people or can be potentially dangerous.
As far as I know, the mactel patch is required for some hardware support on intel-based mac systems and contains important fixes. This does not seem like one patch too many, but an essential one for all users who, like me, have mac hardware. I do understand your wish to reduce the number of patches, but throwing out patches required for support of important hardware does not seem the way to go to me.
Regards, Erwin
I also am using arch on my mac, and I find this essential and should not be removed if you find 2.6.25 compatible patchs (I am sure that they will come out in not so many time)
Arnaud
Hi, I would suggest to test the new kernel on your mac before complaining, perhaps it supports it better now. And if after that much time this patch is necessary for such common hardware and hasn't been imported upstream, I think you should contact the LKML.
Dimitris
It seems that many patches have already been commited into vanilla kernel, but that these patches got minor starting as 2.6.24 ... Now they only add stuff like keyboard keys support and other stuff. I'm not concerned by most of the corrections of this patchset, but macbook users might experience problems with vanilla 2.6.25. (I don't have a macbook for testing) I think they could make a kernel module for these things, but this is out of topic here. The point is that kernel26-ice isn't patched for intel macs, killing some keys on my keyboard but that's all. I really don't know if these kind of patches should be kept or become part of some AUR package maintained by users ... Anyway, the point is that they are now outdated, so they can't be in new Arch kernel. Arnaud
<200804201523.38644.erwin.vandevelde@gmail.com> <200804210019.01554.dreamteam69@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3aa8b0cfdfae24eaddd723301a7e40ba@localhost>
X-Sender: pyther@pyther.net
Received: from adsl-75-33-46-5.dsl.bcvloh.sbcglobal.net [75.33.46.5] with
HTTP/1.1 (POST); Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:48:12 -0400
User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 00:19:01 +0200, Dream Team
Le Sunday 20 April 2008 15:23:38 Erwin Van de Velde, vous avez écrit :
On Saturday 19 April 2008, Thomas Bächler wrote:
- Removed mactel patch
The removal of these patches was because a) there are no new patches
available for 2.6.25 and b) I am trying to reduce the amount of
patching, especially if it only benefits a few people or can be
potentially dangerous.
As far as I know, the mactel patch is required for some hardware support
on intel-based mac systems and contains important fixes. This does not
seem
like one patch too many, but an essential one for all users who, like
me,
have mac hardware.
I do understand your wish to reduce the number of patches, but throwing
out
patches required for support of important hardware does not seem the way
to
go to me.
Regards,
Erwin
I also am using arch on my mac, and I find this essential and should not
be
removed if you find 2.6.25 compatible patchs (I am sure that they will
come
out in not so many time)
Arnaud
It is one patch to many... If you want a mactel kernel then you make a package in aur and patch the kernel sources with the mactel patch. We need to keep the kernel as clean as possible. The more patches we add the more problems we have. The only patches that should included are major security patches and/or patches that fix major hardware issues, devices that are already supported by the kernel. Don't like it? Don't use arch, Simple! We need to get back to the Arch Way!
Thomas Bächler wrote:
The new 2.6.25 kernel and most of the external modules are in [testing]. ... I wish you all happy testing.
Hi Thomas, I've noticed that "loop" is not part of the kernel anymore, but available as a module. cheers waldek
waldek schrieb:
Hi Thomas, I've noticed that "loop" is not part of the kernel anymore, but available as a module.
That was intentional. If you frequently use loop mounts, add the module to rc.conf: MODULES=(...... loop)
participants (8)
-
Arvid Ephraim Picciani
-
Attila
-
Dimitrios Apostolou
-
Dream Team
-
Erwin Van de Velde
-
pyther
-
Thomas Bächler
-
waldek