Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

Bonzodog · 2011-05-26 18:50:05

I read this, and thought I should drop it here;

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=n … &px=OTQ3NQ

Also, the original newsgroup thread (still active as of this morning)

http://groups.google.com/group/linux.ke … e550?pli=1

So, it looks like Linus has had enough of kernel 2.6, and as this year marks the beginning of the third decade, so we should have Linux 3.0. He does mention that the breakage from this will be widespread, as so many low-level scripts reference a kernel 2.6.x and they can handle the 3rd digit changing. Linus has no intention of making this kernel 3.0.0. After 3.0, the next would be 3.1. Possibly looking at making it a new major version change each year, with 4.0 appearing in 2012?

karol · 2011-05-26 18:54:29

http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/ … 20123.html

ewaller · 2011-05-26 18:54:34

FYI- There is a thread on the [Arch-General] mailing list following this topic as I write this

falconindy · 2011-05-26 18:55:06

Bonzodog wrote:

with 4.0 appearing in 2012?

I think you mean 2022.

http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/ … 20123.html

davvil · 2011-05-30 21:30:19

The next kernel will be 3.0. Yay!

https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/5/29/204

It won't be a special release, Linus just decided to change the major version.

flamelab · 2011-05-30 21:35:51

Already preparing a kernel3-git

wonder · 2011-05-30 21:56:55

@flamelab linux-git is already in aur

flamelab · 2011-05-30 22:30:00

wonder wrote:

@flamelab linux-git is already in aur

Thanks, I saw your post before editing

Hmm, it seems the Nvidia driver scripts don't recognize the new naming scheme. I'll go with Nouveau for a bit

Last edited by flamelab (2011-05-30 22:31:12)

WorMzy · 2011-05-30 22:37:47

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=119743

jasonwryan · 2011-05-30 23:28:03

merging...

MurdersLastCrow · 2011-06-02 04:01:10

Hey, it gives us a good excuse to talk about Linux- if things keep up at the pace they have been, GNOME 4 might actually come out around the same time as Linux 4.

But seriously, I think it gives the developers a good moment to consider what they think the next ten years of Linux should encompass. Linus himself said that in 20 years or so he'd hope the kernel wouldn't be such an interesting place for development anymore, that it would be so good that it rarely got massive updates. I mean, if you think about it, with the technology we have built into the kernel now, with multi-touch support, and the improving video drivers, any conceivable improvements I've seen in Sci-Fi (holograms, basically) shouldn't need to be programmed on the kernel level at all.

Does anyone have an idea of what features we really need to improve on aside from the Gallium drivers (and maybe getting Intel to actually invest in a Gallium driver)?

fukawi2 · 2011-06-02 05:40:41

MurdersLastCrow wrote:

Does anyone have an idea of what features we really need to improve on aside from the Gallium drivers (and maybe getting Intel to actually invest in a Gallium driver)?

KVM really needs to stabilize*. And provide paravirtualization.

* Evidence to support my opinion: Quantitative Comparison of Xen and KVM.pdf

EDIT: Added paravirtualization.

Last edited by fukawi2 (2011-06-02 05:42:57)

adee · 2011-06-02 15:24:59

I'm curious how many scripts/programs will break just because they depend on the old numbering scheme.....

hauzer · 2011-06-02 16:05:06

Breaking stuff is sometimes good. Makes people reconsider things.

Last edited by hauzer (2011-06-02 16:05:19)

fukawi2 · 2011-06-03 00:20:21

hauzer wrote:

Breaking stuff is sometimes good. Makes people reconsider things.

Indeed. Assumptions are bad.

WorMzy · 2011-06-03 00:46:46

But then again, breaking things can be bad -- if I wanted a broken OS, I'd use Vista.

ngoonee · 2011-06-03 02:45:37

WorMzy wrote:

But then again, breaking things can be bad -- if I wanted a broken OS, I'd use Vista.

Bad example. Vista is 'broken' partly because of the strong desire NOT to break things (backwards compatibility etc.)

fukawi2 · 2011-06-03 03:03:57

ngoonee wrote:

Bad example. Vista is 'broken' partly because of the strong desire NOT to break things (backwards compatibility etc.)

Yeah, but broken is broken.

jb · 2011-06-03 03:54:16

fukawi2 wrote:

Yeah, but broken is broken.

That sounds right, but can an expert on the topic like allan confirm/deny this?

Allan · 2011-06-03 09:33:09

I can confidently state that broken is not always broken.

ConnorBehan · 2011-06-04 16:30:33

This is so arbitrary... not wanting to count past 40? Lots of programs do that. Hell, vim is at 7.3.177.

franz1789 · 2011-06-04 17:03:43

I also read that he wanted to break also 2.x.x number support from some hardware producers, since sometimes it is said "linux 2.x.x support" and they mean a 5 years old version..

Leonid.I · 2011-06-04 20:59:03

ConnorBehan wrote:

This is so arbitrary... not wanting to count past 40? Lots of programs do that. Hell, vim is at 7.3.177.

Nah, my vim has version numbering like 7.3.<hex mercurial changeset ID>. I think, we should do something similar for linux, only with git changesets

Misfit138 · 2011-06-05 00:23:02

MurdersLastCrow wrote:

Does anyone have an idea of what features we really need to improve on aside from the Gallium drivers (and maybe getting Intel to actually invest in a Gallium driver)?

Uhhh...do you want the long list or the short list?!

twilight0 · 2011-06-05 09:02:15

I think they should have made the change to 3.0 release scheme when they introduced KMS, I think that was a big change.

Arch Linux

#1 2011-05-26 18:50:05

Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#2 2011-05-26 18:54:29

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#3 2011-05-26 18:54:34

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#4 2011-05-26 18:55:06

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#5 2011-05-30 21:30:19

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#6 2011-05-30 21:35:51

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#7 2011-05-30 21:56:55

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#8 2011-05-30 22:30:00

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#9 2011-05-30 22:37:47

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#10 2011-05-30 23:28:03

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#11 2011-06-02 04:01:10

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#12 2011-06-02 05:40:41

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#13 2011-06-02 15:24:59

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#14 2011-06-02 16:05:06

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#15 2011-06-03 00:20:21

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#16 2011-06-03 00:46:46

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#17 2011-06-03 02:45:37

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#18 2011-06-03 03:03:57

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#19 2011-06-03 03:54:16

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#20 2011-06-03 09:33:09

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#21 2011-06-04 16:30:33

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#22 2011-06-04 17:03:43

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#23 2011-06-04 20:59:03

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#24 2011-06-05 00:23:02

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

#25 2011-06-05 09:02:15

Re: Linus and the voices in his head......Linux 3.0?

Board footer