View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
truekaiser l33t
Joined: 05 Mar 2004 Posts: 801
|
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2018 5:31 pm Post subject: Anyone know the reason why stable is still kernel 4.14? |
|
|
The subversion number is approaching triple digits. I've not seen that ever since migrating from suse years and years ago.
Is there a reason why gentoo has not stabilized any newer kernels? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003 Posts: 54237 Location: 56N 3W
|
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2018 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
truekaiser,
Its the newest LTS kernel on kernel.org.
Gentoo only stables LTS kernels. _________________ Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dmpogo Advocate
Joined: 02 Sep 2004 Posts: 3267 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2018 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NeddySeagoon wrote: | truekaiser,
Its the newest LTS kernel on kernel.org.
Gentoo only stables LTS kernels. |
Since when ? I am pretty sure it was not the case sometime before |
|
Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003 Posts: 54237 Location: 56N 3W
|
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2018 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dmpogo,
Its been that way for a while now. There was a discussion about it on one of the mailing lists.
It boils down to what is practical with the effort available. _________________ Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dmpogo Advocate
Joined: 02 Sep 2004 Posts: 3267 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2018 3:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
NeddySeagoon wrote: | dmpogo,
Its been that way for a while now. There was a discussion about it on one of the mailing lists.
It boils down to what is practical with the effort available. |
I can understand the reasons, it is just I clearly remember when stable was not that far from what linux-kernel called stable (though a bit behind),
but for LTS you had to dig way back to find which one is actually LTS. Missed the policy change. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TigerJr Guru
Joined: 19 Jun 2007 Posts: 540
|
Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:48 pm Post subject: Re: Anyone know the reason why stable is still kernel 4.14? |
|
|
truekaiser wrote: | The subversion number is approaching triple digits. I've not seen that ever since migrating from suse years and years ago.
Is there a reason why gentoo has not stabilized any newer kernels? |
New kernel need new work, many included functions need tests to work properly, while new kernel would tested many bug and them pathces can raise minor version number.
If minor number is high - than harder to find bugs in code. So moments of stability would go longer - Long-Term Support
Im still testing 4.0.x ck-kernel at home and 4.4.x kernel at work)) _________________ Do not use gentoo, it die |
|
Back to top |
|
|
steveL Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 5153 Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 9:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
NeddySeagoon wrote: | Its been that way for a while now. There was a discussion about it on one of the mailing lists.
It boils down to what is practical with the effort available. | Damn, that is a terrible policy, as a moment's thought shows.
Thanks for the heads-up, across media, guyz. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bunder Bodhisattva
Joined: 10 Apr 2004 Posts: 5934
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
nvidia-drivers doesn't even work on 4.19 which should be the next lts once greg tags it as such. _________________
Neddyseagoon wrote: | The problem with leaving is that you can only do it once and it reduces your influence. |
banned from #gentoo since sept 2017 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naib Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 6051 Location: Removed by Neddy
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
bunder wrote: | nvidia-drivers doesn't even work on 4.19 which should be the next lts once greg tags it as such. |
but the latest stable nvidia is 396.54 which only need a kernel of 4.6.x. The newer nvidia needs 4.20.x so at least there is consistency... but determining stability of the kernel against LTS does mean other packages will be held back... *IF* you wish to run a stable tree
For the kernel it sort of make sense that LTS is deemed as stable unfortunately... The kernel is the base of all our systems and it depends on itself (and gcc...) everything upstream officially releases could be deemed as stable. Now everything above it... init, daemons, userland starts having more intricate interactions and thus the concept of "stable" is a bit more convoluted. _________________
Quote: | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
truekaiser l33t
Joined: 05 Mar 2004 Posts: 801
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Naib wrote: | bunder wrote: | nvidia-drivers doesn't even work on 4.19 which should be the next lts once greg tags it as such. |
but the latest stable nvidia is 396.54 which only need a kernel of 4.6.x. The newer nvidia needs 4.20.x so at least there is consistency... but determining stability of the kernel against LTS does mean other packages will be held back... *IF* you wish to run a stable tree
For the kernel it sort of make sense that LTS is deemed as stable unfortunately... The kernel is the base of all our systems and it depends on itself (and gcc...) everything upstream officially releases could be deemed as stable. Now everything above it... init, daemons, userland starts having more intricate interactions and thus the concept of "stable" is a bit more convoluted. |
From what i understand you want people to either run the stable tree or full unstable. Stuff like this will cause people to start mix and matching packages which from experience causes problems.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
asturm Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 Posts: 8936
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's not so true for the kernel. Use whatever version you see fit for your hardware support, regardless of 'Gentoo stable' status. The only thing this does is promising fast updates in case of security issues. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naib Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 6051 Location: Removed by Neddy
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
truekaiser wrote: | Naib wrote: | bunder wrote: | nvidia-drivers doesn't even work on 4.19 which should be the next lts once greg tags it as such. |
but the latest stable nvidia is 396.54 which only need a kernel of 4.6.x. The newer nvidia needs 4.20.x so at least there is consistency... but determining stability of the kernel against LTS does mean other packages will be held back... *IF* you wish to run a stable tree
For the kernel it sort of make sense that LTS is deemed as stable unfortunately... The kernel is the base of all our systems and it depends on itself (and gcc...) everything upstream officially releases could be deemed as stable. Now everything above it... init, daemons, userland starts having more intricate interactions and thus the concept of "stable" is a bit more convoluted. |
From what i understand you want people to either run the stable tree or full unstable. Stuff like this will cause people to start mix and matching packages which from experience causes problems.. |
I didn't imply anything like that ..
What I am saying is there is some logic in using lts for the kernel. Likewise just networking the kernel isn't going to cause some crazy keywoeding Frankenstein of a systen _________________
Quote: | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
bunder Bodhisattva
Joined: 10 Apr 2004 Posts: 5934
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Naib wrote: | bunder wrote: | nvidia-drivers doesn't even work on 4.19 which should be the next lts once greg tags it as such. |
but the latest stable nvidia is 396.54 |
i listen to what nvidia tells me to use, and for my 980 they tell me to use 410.73. _________________
Neddyseagoon wrote: | The problem with leaving is that you can only do it once and it reduces your influence. |
banned from #gentoo since sept 2017 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Muso Veteran
Joined: 22 Oct 2002 Posts: 1052 Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
bunder wrote: | nvidia-drivers doesn't even work on 4.19 which should be the next lts once greg tags it as such. |
Code: | ╭─root@Otherness /home/rasalom
╰─# emerge -p gentoo-sources
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild R ] sys-kernel/gentoo-sources-4.19.1
╭─root@Otherness /home/rasalom
╰─# emerge -p nvidia-drivers
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild R ] x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-410.73
╭─root@Otherness /home/rasalom
╰─# lsmod
Module Size Used by
vmnet 49152 13
vmmon 102400 0
nvidia_drm 40960 4
nvidia_modeset 1003520 7 nvidia_drm
nvidia 16048128 262 nvidia_modeset
|
_________________ "You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think" ~ Dorothy Parker
2021 is the year of the Linux Desktop! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naib Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 6051 Location: Removed by Neddy
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 11:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
bunder wrote: | nvidia-drivers doesn't even work on 4.19 which should be the next lts once greg tags it as such. |
Yes it does... CONFIG_PM _________________
Quote: | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
bunder Bodhisattva
Joined: 10 Apr 2004 Posts: 5934
|
Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2018 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
oh you're right, 410.73 does, but 410.66 doesn't. _________________
Neddyseagoon wrote: | The problem with leaving is that you can only do it once and it reduces your influence. |
banned from #gentoo since sept 2017 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
steveL Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 5153 Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 7:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Naib wrote: | For the kernel it sort of make sense that LTS is deemed as stable unfortunately... | No, it does not.
Everyone knows damn well that LTS lags ages behind the main kernel. Once it's out, you can count on support, not on backpatches you might well need, even if backpatches in general are a necessary requirement of providing support. Naib wrote: | The kernel is the base of all our systems and it depends on itself (and gcc...) everything upstream officially releases could be deemed as stable. | Yes, truism that does not shed any light.. if this is your idea of "logic", it's a good thing you are not required to implement logic, only specification.
Personally, I'd check whether you even know what logic really is, were I talking so much nonsense and pretending it were "logic". Naib wrote: | Now everything above it... init, daemons, userland starts having more intricate interactions and thus the concept of "stable" is a bit more convoluted. | And completely irrelevant to the discussion about kernel-stability.
But hey, a bit of irrelevant fluff to pad the "argument" is what passes for "logic" amongst the Neo-Logika.
Top marks for conformity as an "indIVIdual" amongst so many. ("And what do points make people?")
As for logic, you have not presented any, which makes any position you now argue, far less credible.
Token logic, as with token form and token confidence, is no such thing; we merely label it such to dismiss it as phantasm. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dmpogo Advocate
Joined: 02 Sep 2004 Posts: 3267 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NeddySeagoon wrote: | dmpogo,
Its been that way for a while now. There was a discussion about it on one of the mailing lists.
It boils down to what is practical with the effort available. |
BTW, I am not sure it was for so much 'while' (but mind you, I am old enough so that 2-3 years for me is not 'while' but yesterday ).
I think getting up to 4.9 stable was still closer to old model, but then it was that snag with stabilizing 4.12, then withdrawing it, then waiting to stabilize 4.14 where we got lost.
In all expectation 4.18 should have been stable now.
I came to gentoo in 2004 because it was the distribution that had support for 64-bit, while Fedora hadn't yet. And support was in a 'stable' kernel (one of very early 2.6 ones) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Elleni Veteran
Joined: 23 May 2006 Posts: 1270
|
Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 8:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For my situation I am very thankfull/happy, for 4.14 being LTS supported. Reason is, that my damn hoster of my vps only supporting kernel <4.15, as they need to update their hosting system first - based on parallels / virtuozzo - to support newer kernels. So either they will bring their hosts to a level where more recent kernels are supported, or I will have to evaluate an other hoster and migrate my little vps one day, when 4.14 LTS support exceeds. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dmpogo Advocate
Joined: 02 Sep 2004 Posts: 3267 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Elleni wrote: | For my situation I am very thankfull/happy, for 4.14 being LTS supported. Reason is, that my damn hoster of my vps only supporting kernel <4.15, as they need to update their hosting system first - based on parallels / virtuozzo - to support newer kernels. So either they will bring their hosts to a level where more recent kernels are supported, or I will have to evaluate an other hoster and migrate my little vps one day, when 4.14 LTS support exceeds. |
Well, 4.14 will certainly be supported longer than 4.18 And actually, 4.9 is expected to be supported longer than either 4.14 or 4.19
https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naib Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 6051 Location: Removed by Neddy
|
Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dmpogo wrote: | Elleni wrote: | For my situation I am very thankfull/happy, for 4.14 being LTS supported. Reason is, that my damn hoster of my vps only supporting kernel <4.15, as they need to update their hosting system first - based on parallels / virtuozzo - to support newer kernels. So either they will bring their hosts to a level where more recent kernels are supported, or I will have to evaluate an other hoster and migrate my little vps one day, when 4.14 LTS support exceeds. |
Well, 4.14 will certainly be supported longer than 4.18 And actually, 4.9 is expected to be supported longer than either 4.14 or 4.19
https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html |
Its almost like they don't know how to LTS...
4.19 - 2year
4.14 - 3years
4.9 - 7years
4.4 - 6years
3.16 - 6years
(even worse than that, I just can't be arsed dealing with the remaining months...) _________________
Quote: | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
asturm Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 Posts: 8936
|
Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LTS depends on organisation/individual's commitment to it. Those extended time frames need not necessarily have been planned when a version was first declared LTS. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Marcih Apprentice
Joined: 19 Feb 2018 Posts: 213
|
Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Naib wrote: | dmpogo wrote: | Elleni wrote: | For my situation I am very thankfull/happy, for 4.14 being LTS supported. Reason is, that my damn hoster of my vps only supporting kernel <4.15, as they need to update their hosting system first - based on parallels / virtuozzo - to support newer kernels. So either they will bring their hosts to a level where more recent kernels are supported, or I will have to evaluate an other hoster and migrate my little vps one day, when 4.14 LTS support exceeds. |
Well, 4.14 will certainly be supported longer than 4.18 And actually, 4.9 is expected to be supported longer than either 4.14 or 4.19
https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html |
Its almost like they don't know how to LTS...
4.19 - 2year
4.14 - 3years
4.9 - 7years
4.4 - 6years
3.16 - 6years
(even worse than that, I just can't be arsed dealing with the remaining months...) |
B.R.B., moving back to the 4.9 tree. _________________
Bones McCracker wrote: | It wouldn't be so bad, if it didn't suck. |
NeddySeagoon wrote: | The problem with leaving is that you can only do it once and it reduces your influence. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
dmpogo Advocate
Joined: 02 Sep 2004 Posts: 3267 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2018 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Naib wrote: | dmpogo wrote: | Elleni wrote: | For my situation I am very thankfull/happy, for 4.14 being LTS supported. Reason is, that my damn hoster of my vps only supporting kernel <4.15, as they need to update their hosting system first - based on parallels / virtuozzo - to support newer kernels. So either they will bring their hosts to a level where more recent kernels are supported, or I will have to evaluate an other hoster and migrate my little vps one day, when 4.14 LTS support exceeds. |
Well, 4.14 will certainly be supported longer than 4.18 And actually, 4.9 is expected to be supported longer than either 4.14 or 4.19
https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html |
Its almost like they don't know how to LTS...
4.19 - 2year
4.14 - 3years
4.9 - 7years
4.4 - 6years
3.16 - 6years
(even worse than that, I just can't be arsed dealing with the remaining months...) |
I bet it also depends on organizational adoption. If some big RedHat client want longer support - I think that LTS kernel version will get longer support. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TigerJr Guru
Joined: 19 Jun 2007 Posts: 540
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
4.4 it is good kernel, but next 4.9 - need to read changelog
Maybe 4.9 much modern, but now latest 4.4.164 looks better than 4.9.140 _________________ Do not use gentoo, it die |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|