Release Candidates :: DSL v4.0 alpha1



Thank you, rja.
This gives new hope.

I have checked for this " Loading sata_nv.o... " message,
but the boot-procedure is too fast for looking on it.
With my previous sent posts, I assume that it is loaded as well on my computer.

Nevertheless, I have checked for my mainboard specifications, which are as follows:

North Bridge: nVidia Crush 51PV
South Bridge: nVidia MCP 51
2 x SATA II
Phoenix - AwardBIOS v6.00PG
ASUS M2N8L ACPI BIOS Revision 0301

Unfortunately, there is no possibility to change to a native mode, as I remember from an older mainboard with SATA support.

As I am only a Linux user with a limited knowledge of the Linux / Knoppix / DSL - system technology, I would appreciate it, if you could explain step by step:
- Which file(s) copy from where to where?
- And how to access these files from where in which order?
Please give some more informatiom.

Nevertheless I still hope that the 2.6.x kernel will also be supported again in the future. Yes, I have voted for a new kernel 2.4.x as I thought that it will support SATA and network cards as well as the 2.6.x kernel does. But it seems that the support for 2.4.x is very limited and only older units will get full support. It is a pity.
DSL is the best distro for my purposes, as it allows me to bring it from a live-cd to an usb memory-stick in an easy way.
This is the main reason why I prever using DSL.
Also of course because of its modules and its "classic" look.

As already written, I do not know anything about Linux programming nor about the Linux system technology.
Isn't it possibly to do releases with both kernels, 2.4.x and 2.6.x, or does this mean a complete re-programming?
Just in order to have a better understanding.
Thank you in advance.
Quote
Con did make some good points... The -ck patchset added a fairer cpu scheduler, better for desktops.

Has he made a bandaid or a really good solution? Measured *how*? Every time I look at a thread dealing with the issue, it boils down to anecdotal reports of better performance.

Quote
I did change to kernel 2.6.20.14

How big was the ISO, or at least the kernel, compared to the 2.4.26 one you replaced? Was it compiled in similar fashion? Or would that be an apples:oranges comparison?
He had tons of user reports, I felt the difference too when I tried it.. I think he had some sort of benchmark program, but I haven't tried that.. For my experience it went like this:
when I have music playing in X and start Opera, the music stutters once. This did not happen with -ck enabled kernel.. But when I upgraded my kernel, I couldn't get it to boot with -ck, so it kinda left there ;)

Quote
How big was the ISO, or at least the kernel, compared to the 2.4.26 one you replaced? Was it compiled in similar fashion? Or would that be an apples:oranges comparison?
The kernel was bigger, but I was specifically requested for a 2.6 kernel for better h/w support. The kernel was 1.5mb and modules were 12mb, I just checked..
For "similar fashion" I guess you meant did it have as much support. No it didn't; it was for a webkiosk, so anything network related was in, but many filesystems and other stuff not needed were left out.
So comparing them would be an apples/oranges one, as they are for different purposes.

Iso became 93mb, I removed lots of stuff but also added gtk2, firefox2, java, flash 9..
Quote
He had tons of user reports, I felt...

That's what the developers don't want. They want benchmarks that are quantitative, unbiased, objective, etc. Not feelings, not user reports, not "this happened here, but not here." Some criteria that can be presented that shows in black and white that one option is better than another.
http://www.onegoodmove.org/fallacy/causal.htm

By way of analogy (only regarding anecdote and not the merits of proposed codes), I can say that one brand of soap doesn't dry out my skin as much as another brand. How do I know this? Maybe I can "feel" some difference. But when I look at the ingredients for both brands, they're virtually identical. So I can start looking at other factors. I tried Brand A soap in winter when the air wasn't as humid as it is now, and now I'm using Brand B (100% humidity today). I feel a difference. Is it the soap or is it the climate?

The same kind of fallacy is true of snakeoil. Take some magical potion or herb (e.g., echinacea) and you won't get sick. Folks swear by it, so it must be true -- at least until there are studies done to see if it really works, and it usually doesn't.

From everything I've read, the empirical evidence was lacking about whether Kolivas' patch had any measurable benefit over any other scheduler. The developers wanted more than "I clicked on this and it stuttered, but I applied the patch and now it doesn't." That's why his scheduler code wasn't (yet) mainlined.

See this also:
http://kerneltrap.org/node/14008

I strongly disagree with Kolivas' position that desktops are abandoned by 2.6+ development trends. This is like saying that Microsoft abandoned desktops by releasing Server 2008 and CE. With either OS, you have basically the same kernel and code base that can be configured in various ways to suit particular needs. These are, for lack of better ways of explaining, one-size-fits-all. They're just custom-tailored for servers, desktops, and mobile devices. With respect to Linux, that goes beyond distro-compiled kernels and includes custom patches like -ck, grsecurity, etc.

Excluding Kolivas' code from mainline does NOT mean Linux is taking a server-only approach -- it means Linus and other developers aren't convinced (yet) that Kolivas' approach is necessarily the best or even ready for inclusion. Everything I've read showed they had, for the most part, open minds and were continually willing to consider and review what he was suggesting.

It's now irrelevant if he's really walking away from even developing his patches and continuing to offer them as he has unless someone else picks up where he left off. Some of his ideas will probably be implemented eventually. It just won't be from his efforts.

Quote
Iso became 93mb, I removed lots of stuff but also added gtk2, firefox2, java, flash 9..

I had a hunch it would be in the ~100MB (or more) range.
Nice discussion, but how to proceed now?

Is there no easy way to support both kernels?

As I do not have enough knowledge about the Linux system technology, I do not know how much work and time is required to support both kernels in the same way. Can't they be exchanged easily? Do they have different adresses for different routines?
Next Page...
original here.