Kernel 4.6 a worthy one

[GarryRicketson]

Well after all said and done, it is just a Linux kernel, and all of the Linux distros are built
on that.
Linux is very versatile , and anyone can build on to it in anyway they choose,
some methods are more reliable then others.
A system is "broken" when it does not work, but that does not mean one can not
repair it, but most people want and need a system that is reliable, not one that
they are constantly having to repair. Many simply do not have the time, others
do not have the technical skill, and for others it is simply pointless, building a system
that eventually crashes, and is broken, repair it, build it again, and it crashes again.
Sort of like a kid playing with toy "building" blocks, in the child mind, they are building a city, or some kind of castle, or whatever, but in the end , it all falls down.
Yes they do learn from playing with the "building blocks",so it serves a purpose, in learning, but in reality people prefer
to have houses and buildings that last, and are not constantly having to rebuild them.
If system is just a toy and not used it for anything except playing, there is no need for a backup, what is the point ?
The main reasons I stopped using both Ubuntu and Linux mint, was because they are not reliable , stable, everything might work good for a month, but invariably they crash and burn, oh yes, maybe I could fix it, but it all ways just a temporary fix, the next time
there were any updates, it crashes again.
I have not had that trouble with Debian Wheezy, it has been 21 months now, and never
a crash or "broken" system, the Debian Squeeze has been working fine for close to 3 years, but ok, there was 1 failure, broken system, about the same, 21 months ago, but that was due to me using a Ubuntu ppa, or the mint repo, I no longer remember, the main point , it was due to me using a non debian package, and not any fault of the kernel or Debian.
Any way, have fun , do what you want.

[GarryRicketson]

I just want to use last kernels (obiously i dont like to wait), i dont know how to build/compile a kernel, i tried it, but i didnt get it , so i gave it up,

Err, ???? I never said that, please don't quote me as having said that.
Thank you.
This is what I said :
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php? ... 22#p623811

GarryRicketson wrote:
Yes, what would anyone gain from using a Ubuntu kernel?
I suppose, if one wants to use Ubuntu, they would use the ubuntu kernel.
Debian users, obviously would use Debian.

Followed by : http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php? ... ow#p623813

[pylkko]

I want to add two things @ bester:

1) Debian experimental caries RC kernels also. Not all of them, but at times.

2) If you care about the differences between Ubuntu and Debian kernels you can find info on that topic:
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/kernel/ ... an/patches

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Spec ... eltaReview

If you take a look at those you migh get some kind of idea what has been/is done.

[Head_on_a_Stick]

if someday someone convince me tha using ububtu's kernel in debian is very bad idea, i will stop doing that unless there isnt risky:

Perhaps you can "get away" with using Ubuntu kernels as the kernel is very self-contained but I think that problems may occur if you needed any custom kernel modules such as graphics drivers.

However, my main concern would be the use of "RC" ("release candidate") kernels.

You do understand that these images are not considered suitable for "normal" use and are strictly experimental in nature?

For example, the recent kernel bug that afflicted SSDs in RAID0 arrays in which discard filesystem options caused total data corruption:

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98501

RC kernel users are always the first to be hit by bugs such as these.

I would strongly recommend sticking to the latest stable kernel release which can be seen at https://www.kernel.org/

Finally, it seems churlish in the extreme to continue using Ubuntu kernels when @stevepusser has gone to the trouble of packaging up the Liquorix-patched stable (ie, non-RC) kernel images for you...

[bester69]

Try Liquorix kernels. https://liquorix.net/

Yes, i have tested them, liquroix and sparkylinux, i Think they both have available last debian stable based on(4.7.2 kernel), its just i didnt see any diffenrece about using ubuntus's kernel,

indeed as its said here, it might be a good idea to use ubuntu's kernel, as it brings a lot of pathes?? (perhaps better behavior in your own machine??, im just wondering.. ); it also include non-free firmware embeded

I want to add two things @ bester:
...
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Spec ... eltaReview

If you take a look at those you migh get some kind of idea what has been/is done.

[bester69]

...

However, my main concern would be the use of "RC" ("release candidate") kernels.

You do understand that these images are not considered suitable for "normal" use and are strictly experimental in nature?
...

Yes, i do, i would never use an RC kernel for an enviroment productive., I think RC(stage-4) can consider an enought secure an stable kernel for everyday regular user

[Ardouos]

Yes, i do, i would never use an RC kernel for an enviroment productive., I think RC(stage-4) can consider an enought secure an stable kernel for everyday regular user

RC means it isn't stable enough for the every day regular user. Its more for devs and bug hunters.

[ruffwoof]

I have not had that trouble with Debian Wheezy, it has been 21 months now, and never a crash or "broken" system, the Debian Squeeze has been working fine for close to 3 years, but ok, there was 1 failure, broken system, about the same, 21 months ago, but that was due to me using a Ubuntu ppa, or the mint repo, I no longer remember, the main point , it was due to me using a non debian package, and not any fault of the kernel or Debian.
Any way, have fun , do what you want.

How long can you reasonably run a 'fixed' system i.e. no updates other than security patches. If for instance I install Debian Jessie (current stable) today and it all works fine/well and I have no need for updated software (other than security fixes). How long might I realistically get away with that before needing to consider running a conventional upgrade/dist-upgrade? (Assuming security updates are desired).

I've seen Debian Wiki references to the LTS team who support for (at least) 5 years - who take over from the security team, but the indications are that that is "a separate group of volunteers and companies interested in making it a success" - which strikes me as being maybe-maybe-not depending upon desires/needs to do so.

[GarryRicketson]

If for instance I install Debian Jessie (current stable) today and it all works fine/well and I have no need for updated software (other than security fixes). How long might I realistically get away with that before needing to consider running a conventional upgrade/dist-upgrade?

I can not even guess on that, to start with Debian Jessie is really pretty new, it is totally different then the older , previous versions of Debian, and I have not yet really used it, except on a VM.
If the operating system is really stable, it could keep working just fine longer then the Hardware will last, the OS does not "wear out" but the hardware does, you could keep using the same OS indefinably, really.
A example, I have Debian 1.1 and it still works just fine, on a very old Laptop, and also a VM,... Debian 1.1 is 23 years old, it has not "worn out" yet.

How long can you reasonably run a 'fixed' system

I suppose, as long as you want to, but it would depend on what you call "reasonable"
and what your needs are.

by ruffwoof » I've seen Debian Wiki references to the LTS team who support for (at least) 5 years - who take over from the security team, but the indications are that that is "a separate group of volunteers and companies interested in making it a success" - which strikes me as being maybe-maybe-not depending upon desires/needs to do so.

No "maybe" about it, for many companies it is more economical and practical to
contribute, and keep the existing OS supported then it would be to upgrade or

running a conventional upgrade/dist-upgrade?

doing a dist-upgrade,
and having to also upgrade /modify existing packages, or software, etc,... some are using "specialized" software, written specifically for that particular version/OS, etc.
So yes it is both "desire" and need that motivates them to contribute.

Another example of a OS that has not "worn out", below,..

from: https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/news/ ... ing-alive/
Podcast: FreeDOS keeps classic computing alive
2016-08-14 4:27pm

The LPX Podcast recently posted an interview with Jim about FreeDOS. From the podcast website: "A generation of computer users grew up using Microsoft DOS in the 80s and 90s, but Microsoft started to phase out the operating system with the launch of Windows 95. Decades later, there are still people playing DOS-based games and even corporations using DOS-based software. For more than two decades the developers of FreeDOS have been offering a free and open source alternative to Microsoft’s defunct operating system. I reached out to Jim Hall for a conversation about FreeDOS, classic computing, and free software." The podcast episode is about 30 minutes.

Apology to the OP, we seem to have made a complete "turn around", now, instead of
talking about the newest kernels, etc,... we are talking about using the oldest, most reliable ones


I guess I am in the reverse , from the OP, instead of all ways looking for the "newest" , I keep looking at the "oldest".

[pylkko]

bester,

You post about:

• Stretch not being ready yet
• how to get newer software
• that you like Ubuntu kernels
• doing things "the Debian way" is too complicated
• you like the changes that Ubuntu makes to upstream

Yet you don't use Ubuntu, I wonder why? AFAIK you have never posted anything about that topic. There must be some reason.

[bester69]

bester,

You post about:

• Stretch not being ready yet
• how to get newer software
• that you like Ubuntu kernels
• doing things "the Debian way" is too complicated
• you like the changes that Ubuntu makes to upstream

Yet you don't use Ubuntu, I wonder why? AFAIK you have never posted anything about that topic. There must be some reason.

Hi pylkko,

I suppose it would be kind of the same to use debian or ubuntu to me, i got used to debian, i like it, i like synaptic, and i find i'm able to take more control over debian than over ubuntu, but i suppose thats a thing about learning. i also feel debian is more flexible, perhaps im wrong..

I also like more debian cos is rolling release,.. and i suppose its great to know we're using the most stable distro of all of them.

Im glad with bpo's and third repositories ,so i think i dont have almost any problem with debian, its just some software like KDE, you have to wait to Streetch cos isnt gonna be backported.


By the way, Ive installed today kernel 4.8 RC5, there seems still some way to stable release.

regards

[Innovate]

Now I'm on 4.7.3 stable waiting our lord release 4.8 stable.
I always confuse about choosing source to complie between these 2 sites.
https://www.kernel.org/ They've the latest stable but developed & hotfix by bunch of community developers.
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/releases Purely release by our lord Linus.