Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

pogeymanz · 2009-12-26 01:36:28

I know that these kinds of posts always come across the wrong way, but I'm just wondering if there is something in particular that is going to be troublesome with this kernel.

I promise that if I had more than one computer I would have Arch with [testing] enabled on one.

Last edited by pogeymanz (2009-12-26 01:36:45)

falconindy · 2009-12-26 01:38:26

Probably the holidays. You can always subscribe to arch-dev-public if you want to know what the devs are talking about.

Allan · 2009-12-26 01:43:12

pogeymanz wrote:

I promise that if I had more than one computer I would have Arch with [testing] enabled on one.

Wimp!

Anyway, from what I have read there are issues with KMS and Ati cards that still need fixed.

Barrucadu · 2009-12-26 01:48:20

Allan wrote:

Anyway, from what I have read there are issues with KMS and Ati cards that still need fixed.

KMS + ATi is fun. You don't know if you'll get any form of user interface displayed at all after every kernel/video update

R00KIE · 2009-12-26 16:15:31

Barrucadu wrote:

Allan wrote:
Anyway, from what I have read there are issues with KMS and Ati cards that still need fixed.
KMS + ATi is fun. You don't know if you'll get any form of user interface displayed at all after every kernel/video update

Yeah, that's completely right, things are still in a turmoil right now, what works for some users doesn't work for others. With my notebook kms just hangs (hd2400), with my desktop (x600) it works just fine

On a related subject, I don't have [testing] enabled but I do download the packages I want to test (the kernel mostly) and install them. Surprise of surprises the last incarnation of the kernel build just hangs when loading the radeon module for my card (radeonhd 2400), now I know how to fix and I know not to be scared because of that (I know the cause) but imagine deploying that to the general public.

Granted Arch is a bleeding edge distro but in my experience the problems that arise when not using any testing stuff are less than for some other popular distros, I guess because things are actually tested (and problems reported) before being released instead of being released just to say we have the latest versions so don't complain that Arch doesn't have the latest kernel in the official repos yet

tomd123 · 2009-12-26 16:20:53

I wonder how KahelOS is dealing with these issues since they have testing enabled in their 'enterprise' product

stefanwilkens · 2009-12-26 18:02:43

A new signoff round started today:
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/ … 09862.html

Signoff rounds where attempted for 2.6.32.1-1, 2.6.32.2-1 and now 2.6.32.2-2

You'll find some discussions here:
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/ … hread.html

toofishes · 2009-12-26 18:12:36

As is always the case with new software, bugs come crawling out. The kernel being core to the system can expose a lot of issues, and when it is having to interface with 5 other userspace packages to get the job done here with ATI, DRM, mesa, KMS, xorg, blah blah blah it causes headaches.

None of us are holding this up to be evil, I promise. But we'd much rather deal with 2 or 3 of these threads than 20 or 30 bug reports going "OMG my system just has a black screen~!!@!11".

.:B:. · 2009-12-26 18:35:46

pogeymanz wrote:

I know that these kinds of posts always come across the wrong way, but I'm just wondering if there is something in particular that is going to be troublesome with this kernel.
I promise that if I had more than one computer I would have Arch with [testing] enabled on one.

No excuse

* B runs his laptop on testing, and that's the system he uses every day.

skottish · 2009-12-26 18:56:16

[sarcasm]I'm looking forward to all of the threads about the rt200* based network chip regression[/sarcasm]

pogeymanz · 2009-12-26 19:44:25

B wrote:

pogeymanz wrote:
I know that these kinds of posts always come across the wrong way, but I'm just wondering if there is something in particular that is going to be troublesome with this kernel.
I promise that if I had more than one computer I would have Arch with [testing] enabled on one.
No excuse
* B runs his laptop on testing, and that's the system he uses every day.

You're a better man than I am, sir. I became a little less daring when I was using the nouveau driver and it froze X while I was working on a project that was due the same day.

.:B:. · 2009-12-26 20:54:27

skottish wrote:

[sarcasm]I'm looking forward to all of the threads about the rt200* based network chip regression[/sarcasm]

You already posted a workaround. I am fully confident every affected user will look that thread up before one dares posting a topic about it .

.:B:. · 2009-12-26 21:01:14

pogeymanz wrote:

B wrote:
pogeymanz wrote:
I know that these kinds of posts always come across the wrong way, but I'm just wondering if there is something in particular that is going to be troublesome with this kernel.
I promise that if I had more than one computer I would have Arch with [testing] enabled on one.
No excuse
* B runs his laptop on testing, and that's the system he uses every day.
You're a better man than I am, sir. I became a little less daring when I was using the nouveau driver and it froze X while I was working on a project that was due the same day.

I have blacklisted the Intel driver, it was locking my box up every few hours here. Other than that, I can't really complain. Usually it is X stuff that makes testing break.

skottish · 2009-12-26 21:02:20

B wrote:

skottish wrote:
[sarcasm]I'm looking forward to all of the threads about the rt200* based network chip regression[/sarcasm]
You already posted a workaround. I am fully confident every affected user will look that thread up before one dares posting a topic about it .

Your optimism trumps my pessimism once again B. And have no fear, I'll personally answer all 500 threads when they come up.

litemotiv · 2009-12-26 21:04:20

tomd123 wrote:

I wonder how KahelOS is dealing with these issues since they have testing enabled in their 'enterprise' product

lulz

Allan · 2009-12-26 21:07:13

litemotiv wrote:

tomd123 wrote:
I wonder how KahelOS is dealing with these issues since they have testing enabled in their 'enterprise' product
lulz

I also noticed that. It will definitely be interesting for them because they took our packages for their install CD before any of the fixes related to ATi and KMS went into the repos...

.:B:. · 2009-12-26 21:08:22

skottish wrote:

B wrote:
skottish wrote:
[sarcasm]I'm looking forward to all of the threads about the rt200* based network chip regression[/sarcasm]
You already posted a workaround. I am fully confident every affected user will look that thread up before one dares posting a topic about it .
Your optimism trumps my pessimism once again B. And have no fear, I'll personally answer all 500 threads when they come up.

I expected nothing less .

graysky · 2009-12-27 15:29:45

pogeymanz wrote:

I promise that if I had more than one computer I would have Arch with [testing] enabled on one.

Just install the kernel packages from testing, nothing else. You can always downgrade.

1) uncomment testing in your /etc/pacman.conf
2) pacman -Syy
3) pacman -S kernel26 (if you need the firmware package, nvidia, lirc, or the headers add them too)
4) comment out the testing archive in the pacman.conf and redo a pacman -Syy
5) reboot and enjoy

wonder · 2009-12-27 15:33:28

graysky wrote:

pogeymanz wrote:
I promise that if I had more than one computer I would have Arch with [testing] enabled on one.
Just install the kernel packages from testing, nothing else. You can always downgrade.
1) uncomment testing in your /etc/pacman.conf
2) pacman -Syy
3) pacman -S kernel26 (if you need the firmware package, nvidia, lirc, or the headers add them too)

upgrade to testing and don't cherry pick. because of that bugs appear.
pacman -Syu

Vamp898 · 2009-12-27 18:41:03

There is an bug in 2.6.32 too with RT2860 Wireless Card http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=86447

It seems like 2.6.32 can´t use WPA/WPA2 Mixed Encrypted wireless connections (which is a widely used encryption).

But it is not 100% sure, maybe the driver does not work with any wireless im still going to test it

ammon · 2009-12-27 19:24:52

I have installed it today, and there was some problem with dbus (I dont know what, I have seen something while booting) but system worked fine. I have downgraded it just to be sure.

Cyrusm · 2009-12-28 17:29:49

Barrucadu wrote:

Allan wrote:
Anyway, from what I have read there are issues with KMS and Ati cards that still need fixed.
KMS + ATi is fun. You don't know if you'll get any form of user interface displayed at all after every kernel/video update

kernel 2.6.32 made my life interesting, one day the radeonhd driver stops working, so I switch to ati + kms and it works better than ever. then I do an update and get a black screen, disable KMS, switch back to radeonhd, and now radeonhd works better than ever. I can't wait till next update when it all goes foobar on me again

moljac024 · 2009-12-28 17:58:55

B wrote:

skottish wrote:
B wrote:
You already posted a workaround. I am fully confident every affected user will look that thread up before one dares posting a topic about it .
Your optimism trumps my pessimism once again B. And have no fear, I'll personally answer all 500 threads when they come up.
I expected nothing less .

I'm sorry, but what is this workaround?
And when will I be able to remove the kernel from IgnorePkg? I need my wireless (rt2500usb) to work...

Cyrusm · 2009-12-28 18:03:03

moljac024
http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=86260

just to save you some digging:

sudo iwconfig <yourwirelessinterface> power off

and like magic, it works.

Last edited by Cyrusm (2009-12-28 18:08:25)

keenerd · 2009-12-28 19:56:14

On a related note:

> pacman -Syys kernel
...
core/kernel-headers 2.6.32-1 (base)
Kernel headers sanitized for use in userspace
core/kernel26 2.6.31.6-1 (base)
The Linux Kernel and modules
...

Aren't the headers and the kernel supposed to match?

Arch Linux

#1 2009-12-26 01:36:28

Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#2 2009-12-26 01:38:26

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#3 2009-12-26 01:43:12

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#4 2009-12-26 01:48:20

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#5 2009-12-26 16:15:31

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#6 2009-12-26 16:20:53

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#7 2009-12-26 18:02:43

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#8 2009-12-26 18:12:36

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#9 2009-12-26 18:35:46

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#10 2009-12-26 18:56:16

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#11 2009-12-26 19:44:25

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#12 2009-12-26 20:54:27

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#13 2009-12-26 21:01:14

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#14 2009-12-26 21:02:20

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#15 2009-12-26 21:04:20

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#16 2009-12-26 21:07:13

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#17 2009-12-26 21:08:22

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#18 2009-12-27 15:29:45

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#19 2009-12-27 15:33:28

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#20 2009-12-27 18:41:03

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#21 2009-12-27 19:24:52

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#22 2009-12-28 17:29:49

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#23 2009-12-28 17:58:55

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#24 2009-12-28 18:03:03

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

#25 2009-12-28 19:56:14

Re: Is there something holding back kernel 2.6.32?

Board footer