Ubuntu 9.04 Will NOT Ship With The Linux 2.6.29 Kernel

[Kano]

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...

[Vadi]

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.

[Kano]

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.

[Vadi]

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.

[M1AU]

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

[Kano]

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/kernel-package/download

[DanL]

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).

[jeffro-tull]

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.

[sreyan]

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.

[Svartalf]

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.