Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: Ubuntu 9.04 Will NOT Ship With The Linux 2.6.29 Kernel

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,634

    Default

    Compared to lenny release kernel, 2.6.28 is a much better choice. Also Debian stays with old ide drivers to make updates more easy which I don't like at all. One of my nic needs an update to r8169 driver, which does not work up to 2.6.27, so no way for network install lenny...

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    677

    Default

    People don't want FF3, they want OOo3, but not this and that...

    I think it's fine to stick with a bit of stability - Ubuntu has lately been getting critism lately for being unstable and having hardware stuff completely break.

    ie, bluetooth not working at all atm.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,634

    Default

    OOO3 is really easy to get, from openoffice.org you get debian packages for 32 + 64 bit which work with etch and any newer distro.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    677

    Default

    Except that the only big feature of OOo3 was the ms compatibility, which ubuntu's 2.4 version was patched with. So people just fussed over nothing.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    134

    Default

    I'm also interested in the current Ext4 situation. Does 2.6.28 has any drawbacks compared to 2.6.29?

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,634

    Default

    There are ext4 backports, but for all who like to use 2.6.29 in a correct way (packaged) you can do this:

    sudo apt-get install kernel-package fakeroot

    cd dir-with-source

    LANG= make-kpkg --initrd --rootcmd fakeroot --revision 1 --us --uc kernel_image kernel_headers

    then you get 2 debs - which work fine with dkms too. In case your kernel-package is too old just fetch the one from Debian:

    http://packages.debian.org/sid/all/k...ckage/download

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,277

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by remm View Post
    I've been using 2.6.29 on F10 (they already have test packages) due to wifi problems, and looked like a great kernel to me. Not sure the Ubuntu folks really know what they are doing kernel wise, of course
    I think the Ubuntu devs made an informed decision here, and just because a kernel still in devlopment worked well for you, it doesn't mean that it's a good idea for Ubuntu to adopt it (especially at this stage of their release cycle).

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Parish, NY
    Posts
    159

    Default

    I never thought Ubuntu prided itself on being a bleeding edge distribution. So, what's the problem? They've got the stable 2.6.28, and they've got... 2 months to fix whatever bugs need to be fixed. Good call on their part.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vadi View Post
    Except that the only big feature of OOo3 was the ms compatibility, which ubuntu's 2.4 version was patched with. So people just fussed over nothing.
    Actually on my netbook, OOo 3 starts up far far faster than 2.4. I don't really care about MS compatibility that much.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vadi View Post
    Except that the only big feature of OOo3 was the ms compatibility, which ubuntu's 2.4 version was patched with. So people just fussed over nothing.

    Actually, there appears some minor OO formatting changes (it dinks up a few things in Impress at the least...not sure why, but...)- if you've got someone using OO.org 3, and you get something from there, the content opens, but you may find some minor reformatting work needing to be done there. I found this out by doing a VirtualBox demo and did some editing between the 2.4 version and the 3.0 version on the Windows side and ended up needing to have the same versions in hand to pull my stupid PC stunt with VirtualBox (i.e. Editing the slides in the XP VM, doing it again in the Linux side directly, and then back again on the XP side.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •