[SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

hellnest · 2010-11-18 08:37:35

I know that using command uname-a will bring up the current installed kernel. But since i read that so many custom kernel / mod kernel / etc. How to check which one is currently installed on my system? I'm not currently running Arch yet, but distro based on Arch.

Thanks for the respons

Last edited by hellnest (2010-11-19 07:09:22)

ngoonee · 2010-11-18 09:18:24

pacman -Qs kernel26?

hellnest · 2010-11-18 09:45:18

I'm running on chakra 2.6.36-7 if i'm not wrong, just do an update a couple hour ago. So if i want to build an arch KDE using the same kernel would it be same with chakra kernel or be different??

.:B:. · 2010-11-18 11:31:53

If you want Arch, install Arch. If you want to stick with Chakra, go ask on their forums . We don't support Chakra.

ilpianista · 2010-11-18 12:04:31

Topic moved in "Newbie Corner", who moved it in Announcements?

.:B:. · 2010-11-18 12:34:51

That must have been me... I intended to move it to the Newbie corner . Apologies.

angvp · 2010-11-18 12:39:19

Ok, please be careful until move threads to announcements, this thread appeared on many planets, and socials networks like twitter, identi.ca, etc. So we generated some global warming without need <g>

RaisedFist · 2010-11-18 12:49:36

I came here reading the topic title on google reader, following the rss feed of archplanet.. dumb!

ilpianista · 2010-11-18 12:59:36

angvp wrote:

Ok, please be careful until move threads to announcements, this thread appeared on many planets, and socials networks like twitter, identi.ca, etc. So we generated some global warming without need <g>

removed from the planet, but too late...

hellnest · 2010-11-18 13:00:19

actually i'm not asking regarding chakra. I was asking about the kernel it self. Anyway Thanks for the answer and all the support. I just want to make sure about a different between any kernel and how it works. Does it have any special mod or tweak or something like that. Or it's just universal type with modification from the configuration things not the kernel it self.

It's sound that all guys here don't like about chakra. Is there something wrong with them? I didn't try to bring up this topic. I open the thread on Kernel SF because i was wondering about the kernel not the distribution it self. I'm asking in arch because i'm personally respect all arch member as an expert with this kind of stuff...

IMHO, Chakra is quite good and they have a warm small community. Let's don't start non-sense talk with bring up distro minded stuff. Maybe you just don't get what my questions mean on 3rd post.

Last edited by hellnest (2010-11-18 13:09:15)

.:B:. · 2010-11-18 13:10:27

There's nothing wrong with Chakra. They build (or used to build) their distro on Arch but they will not do so anymore in the future. We get plenty of people posting about packages breaking in Chakra, and that's not Arch's fault - the Chakra devs are the ones responsible for their updates, not the Arch devs. Chakra targets a different public, and where the Arch installation is a filter on the influx of new users, Chakra is not. People think 'yay Arch has an easy install - its' Chakra' and install Chakra, think they run Arch, and start posting about every tidbit over here.

If you run Chakra, you run Chakra; not Arch. It's as simple as that. You're not running Arch; you're running a heavily modified distro that's been built to provide a KDE environment as default DE, with extra repos that in some case supercede those of Arch Linux itself. If you want to mess that up, that's your choice - but it will only make your life more complicated (and ours, if you bug us with that kind of problems).

Arch has 2.6.35.8 in its stable repositories and 2.6.36 in testing. We don't have a 2.6.36-7 kernel, only a 2.6.36-3 kernel, so the kernel you're running is provided by Chakra. If you want to know what the differences are - besides the obvious upstream different release versions - then look at the patches Arch and Chakra apply, and at their build scripts. It's as easy as that.

There's nothing anti-Chakra or pro-Arch about my remark. I am trying to make you aware Chakra is more than just Arch with some rebranding - if you want to ignore that or read that any differently than I intended, that's up to you.

hellnest · 2010-11-18 13:15:57

.:B:. wrote:

There's nothing wrong with Chakra. They build (or used to build) their distro on Arch but they will not do so anymore in the future. We get plenty of people posting about packages breaking in Chakra, and that's not Arch's fault - the Chakra devs are the ones responsible for their updates, not the Arch devs. Chakra targets a different public, and where the Arch installation is a filter on the influx of new users, Chakra is not. People think 'yay Arch has an easy install - its' Chakra' and install Chakra, think they run Arch, and start posting about every tidbit over here.
If you run Chakra, you run Chakra; not Arch. It's as simple as that. You're not running Arch; you're running a heavily modified distro that's been built to provide a KDE environment as default DE, with extra repos that in some case supercede those of Arch Linux itself. If you want to mess that up, that's your choice - but it will only make your life more complicated (and ours, if you bug us with that kind of problems).
Arch has 2.6.35.8 in its stable repositories and 2.6.36 in testing. So unless you explicitly enabled testing on Arch (which I guess you did not - I don't see people installing Chakra and then enable Arch testing repos), you're not running an Arch kernel but one built by Chakra devs.

Ok i got what you mean. So can we stop bring up that chakra and arch stuff? I would prefer to talking about the kernel and how it works. Even many people complaining about chakra i'm not one of them. Actually Linux is universal OS so i thought Arch must be proud that people thought almost all arch user and develop is Bleeding edge and have an expert knowledge with all the techy stuff.

Arch running 2.6.36 in testing, so with this poin you mean that All distribution have they own "kernel" including they own patch and modification right?

fsckd · 2010-11-18 19:02:33

Universally, use uname as you stated in your first post.

Actually, Linux is not a universal OS. It is a kernel used by many different OSes. It is also an OS family (which Android, despite using the Linux kernel, is not a part of). Most of these OSes share a common userland but structure them very differently; compare Debian, GoboLinux and ArchLinux. Each distro has it's own set of repositories of packages, it's own set of patches applied to some (or all) of the packages, it's own set of tools for managing and interacting with its repositories.

Arch kernels I have installed:

$ set src '/boot' ; file $src/* | grep Linux | sed "s,^$src/\([^:]*\):.*\(version [^ ]*\).*\$,\1\t\2,"
vmlinuz26       version 2.6.35-ARCH
vmlinuz26-bfs   version 2.6.36-bfs
vmlinuz26-pf    version 2.6.35-pf

Debian kernels:

$ set src '/deb/boot' ; file $src/* | grep Linux | sed "s,^$src/\([^:]*\):.*\(version [^ ]*\).*\$,\1\t\2,"
vmlinuz-2.6.32-3-686    version 2.6.32-3-686
vmlinuz-2.6.32-5-686    version 2.6.32-5-686
vmlinuz-2.6.32-trunk-686        version 2.6.32-trunk-686

See how the naming is different and the versioning is different? It's still the same Linux upstream (well, different versions) but with different patches, compilation options, etc. when packaged for the distro.

Yet every Linux OS has the same core binaries: whois; trace; date; yacc; gawk; ssh; unzip; strip; find; touch; finger; head; uptime; whereis; latex; mount; join; nice; man; top; split; fsck; gasp; more; yes; exit; umount; sleep; dump.

I'll show myself out.

ngoonee · 2010-11-19 01:42:29

hellnest wrote:

Ok i got what you mean. So can we stop bring up that chakra and arch stuff? I would prefer to talking about the kernel and how it works. Even many people complaining about chakra i'm not one of them. Actually Linux is universal OS so i thought Arch must be proud that people thought almost all arch user and develop is Bleeding edge and have an expert knowledge with all the techy stuff.
Arch running 2.6.36 in testing, so with this poin you mean that All distribution have they own "kernel" including they own patch and modification right?

The fact is that if you're using Chakra this is not the place to look for support. We don't use it and can't provide any help.

And as the previous poster said, Linux is not a universal OS, nor are Arch users 'Linux disciples' (not all of us anyway).

And you do seem to lack some of the basic background knowledge we'd normally expect from Arch users. Not your fault, but I'll just inform you that further discussion on this topic in the Arch forums will likely be a frustrating experience for you.

hellnest · 2010-11-19 06:31:19

fsckd wrote:

Universally, use uname as you stated in your first post.
Actually, Linux is not a universal OS. It is a kernel used by many different OSes. It is also an OS family (which Android, despite using the Linux kernel, is not a part of). Most of these OSes share a common userland but structure them very differently; compare Debian, GoboLinux and ArchLinux. Each distro has it's own set of repositories of packages, it's own set of patches applied to some (or all) of the packages, it's own set of tools for managing and interacting with its repositories.
Arch kernels I have installed:
$ set src '/boot' ; file $src/* | grep Linux | sed "s,^$src/$[^:]*$:.*$version [^ ]*$.*\$,\1\t\2,"
vmlinuz26       version 2.6.35-ARCH
vmlinuz26-bfs   version 2.6.36-bfs
vmlinuz26-pf    version 2.6.35-pf
Debian kernels:
$ set src '/deb/boot' ; file $src/* | grep Linux | sed "s,^$src/$[^:]*$:.*$version [^ ]*$.*\$,\1\t\2,"
vmlinuz-2.6.32-3-686    version 2.6.32-3-686
vmlinuz-2.6.32-5-686    version 2.6.32-5-686
vmlinuz-2.6.32-trunk-686        version 2.6.32-trunk-686
See how the naming is different and the versioning is different? It's still the same Linux upstream (well, different versions) but with different patches, compilation options, etc. when packaged for the distro.
Yet every Linux OS has the same core binaries: whois; trace; date; yacc; gawk; ssh; unzip; strip; find; touch; finger; head; uptime; whereis; latex; mount; join; nice; man; top; split; fsck; gasp; more; yes; exit; umount; sleep; dump.
I'll show myself out.

Thanks this information is what i need.. you answered my question! Thank you very much

hellnest · 2010-11-19 06:39:23

ngoonee wrote:

hellnest wrote:
Ok i got what you mean. So can we stop bring up that chakra and arch stuff? I would prefer to talking about the kernel and how it works. Even many people complaining about chakra i'm not one of them. Actually Linux is universal OS so i thought Arch must be proud that people thought almost all arch user and develop is Bleeding edge and have an expert knowledge with all the techy stuff.
Arch running 2.6.36 in testing, so with this poin you mean that All distribution have they own "kernel" including they own patch and modification right?
The fact is that if you're using Chakra this is not the place to look for support. We don't use it and can't provide any help.
And as the previous poster said, Linux is not a universal OS, nor are Arch users 'Linux disciples' (not all of us anyway).
And you do seem to lack some of the basic background knowledge we'd normally expect from Arch users. Not your fault, but I'll just inform you that further discussion on this topic in the Arch forums will likely be a frustrating experience for you.

I will answer an i will mark this thread as SOLVED

1. I'm not tht stupid
2. I'm not that noob
3. Maybe i can't speak english clearly that's causing miss understanding for people to understand my questions
4. i just want to ask and have more experience in Linux
5. STOP bring up this distro stuff inside my thread * at least it will be closed now

Thanks for your first answer also, i really appreaciate that ^^

Arch Linux

#1 2010-11-18 08:37:35

[SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#2 2010-11-18 09:18:24

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#3 2010-11-18 09:45:18

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#4 2010-11-18 11:31:53

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#5 2010-11-18 12:04:31

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#6 2010-11-18 12:34:51

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#7 2010-11-18 12:39:19

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#8 2010-11-18 12:49:36

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#9 2010-11-18 12:59:36

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#10 2010-11-18 13:00:19

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#11 2010-11-18 13:10:27

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#12 2010-11-18 13:15:57

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#13 2010-11-18 19:02:33

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#14 2010-11-19 01:42:29

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#15 2010-11-19 06:31:19

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

#16 2010-11-19 06:39:23

Re: [SOLVED] How to identify Current kernel?

Board footer