Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux 6.6 Formally Becomes This Year's LTS Kernel

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    But will they skip 6.6.6 due to superstition?

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by bitterseeds View Post
      But will they skip 6.6.6 due to superstition?
      With any luck they stick to it due to being totally rad 😈

      Comment


      • #13
        The first release with a new process scheduler is LTS? That seems a little bit concerning.

        Comment


        • #14
          Well, 6.6 will last me until 6.7 anyway

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by Malsabku View Post

            For Ubuntu 24.04 LTS the Kernel 6.7 would be better, since its closer to their release date.
            Ubuntu uses their own kernel spin, not the LTS upstream.

            6.6 makes sense though. One of the back stories going on here is that ia64 (Itanium) support would be removed after this year's LTS kernel was finalized/named/chosen. IA64 was removed in 6.7 so 6.6 is the LTS. This gives the 2 or 3 hobbiests that want to waste electricity on Itanium (they're notoriously power hungry and hot) hardware can still do so running Linux for the next couple of years till they figure out a path forward. Personally I hope they just realize that hardware has no future and contributes nothing useful to computing in general at this point. No, not even for testing purposes like OpenBSD does with legacy systems because of the way the architecture handles execution paths.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by andyprough View Post
              There were quite a few systems that could not be upgraded from 4.9 to 4.14 this past year. When 4.14 and 4.19 reach EOL, expect that a much larger number of systems are going to fail to work properly with newer kernels.

              While it's good that newer machines are more energy efficient, the obverse is true about decisions like this increasing the rate of e-waste accumulation. Computers should be made to last much longer and to use fewer toxic and rare earth metal components. Constantly chasing Moore's Law speed increases at all costs is not without longterm harm for the environment and mankind.
              The question should be: why do these devices not work on newer upstream kernels? Most likely because drivers were not upstreamed / not FOSS. So if you want to avoid waste - upstream your drivers. And don't buy from vendors who don't.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by treba View Post

                The question should be: why do these devices not work on newer upstream kernels? Most likely because drivers were not upstreamed / not FOSS. So if you want to avoid waste - upstream your drivers. And don't buy from vendors who don't.
                To be fair, drivers in the Linux kernel break all the time because they're poorly or not-at-all maintained even though they're FOSS. FOSS is not a silver bullet. Someone still has to have the skills, the hardware, and the drive to maintain that code at the velocity the Linux kernel is changing. That's actually more rare than people think it is because most of the paid positions aren't for desktop drivers. It's for embedded & server hardware.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by treba View Post

                  The question should be: why do these devices not work on newer upstream kernels? Most likely because drivers were not upstreamed / not FOSS. So if you want to avoid waste - upstream your drivers. And don't buy from vendors who don't.
                  There's also a lot of devices that'll never be able to be updated, like some Android devices, because they have locked/signed bootloaders. All their bits and pieces are open source and in the kernel, but the device itself isn't capable of being updated by the end user or, if it is able to be unlocked, it has a built-in kill switch that disables advanced functionality if the device is unlocked (Sony phones are notorious for that) or you have to agree to lose your warranty (Motorola).

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

                    There's also a lot of devices that'll never be able to be updated, like some Android devices, because they have locked/signed bootloaders. All their bits and pieces are open source and in the kernel, but the device itself isn't capable of being updated by the end user or, if it is able to be unlocked, it has a built-in kill switch that disables advanced functionality if the device is unlocked (Sony phones are notorious for that) or you have to agree to lose your warranty (Motorola).
                    I think it's arguable Motorola's disclaimer is actually enforceable. Many US states don't allow warranties to exclude 3rd party maintenance.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by stormcrow View Post

                      To be fair, drivers in the Linux kernel break all the time because they're poorly or not-at-all maintained even though they're FOSS. FOSS is not a silver bullet. Someone still has to have the skills, the hardware, and the drive to maintain that code at the velocity the Linux kernel is changing. That's actually more rare than people think it is because most of the paid positions aren't for desktop drivers. It's for embedded & server hardware.
                      Sure, if there's neither a vendor nor a community that maintains things, things will break eventually. But maintaining LTS kernels is also work that has to be done (and paid) by somebody.

                      Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

                      There's also a lot of devices that'll never be able to be updated, like some Android devices, because they have locked/signed bootloaders. All their bits and pieces are open source and in the kernel, but the device itself isn't capable of being updated by the end user or, if it is able to be unlocked, it has a built-in kill switch that disables advanced functionality if the device is unlocked (Sony phones are notorious for that) or you have to agree to lose your warranty (Motorola).
                      ​Yeah, but such devices won't necessarily get updates even if the kernels are still maintained. Such vendors are IMO just bad actors which have to be forced to get better, either by consumers or regulators. Such as the EU, which will start requiring vendors to support hardware for at least 5 years if they want to sell their products at all. Which, with shorter LTS cycles, will mean they'll be forced to update their kernels. Which IMO is a good thing.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X