Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On Lu, 27 aug 12, 21:47:08, Ralf Mardorf wrote: I often build vanilla + patch-rt. Usually I copy the Debian's default kernel config, change some settings to fit to rt needs and then run make oldconfig. Have you tried the new rt flavour of Debian kernels? $ uname -a Linux think 3.2.0-3-rt-686-pae #1 SMP PREEMPT RT Mon Jul 23 05:49:20 UTC 2012 i686 GNU/Linux Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On Tue, 2012-08-28 at 09:41 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Lu, 27 aug 12, 21:47:08, Ralf Mardorf wrote: I often build vanilla + patch-rt. Usually I copy the Debian's default kernel config, change some settings to fit to rt needs and then run make oldconfig. Have you tried the new rt flavour of Debian kernels? $ uname -a Linux think 3.2.0-3-rt-686-pae #1 SMP PREEMPT RT Mon Jul 23 05:49:20 UTC 2012 i686 GNU/Linux No, usually packages for the kernel-rt are as good as a self build kernel, but to keep knowledge about Linux Rt it's good to build the kernel and perhaps minimal better optimization of the kernel to my machine + minimal better optimization of other things, might result in an noticeable improvement. Regards, Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1346173321.1234.52.camel@localhost.localdomain
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On 8/26/2012 6:39 PM, Gary Dale wrote: Experimental kernels are probably better than downloading the source from kernel.org and compiling it. I disagree. I've been running late model vanilla kernels with Stable for many years without issue. Currently I'm running vanilla 3.2.6 w/Squeeze since shortly after kernel.org released 3.2.6 as stable, on one box almost exactly 6 months ago: Linux greer 3.2.6 #1 SMP Mon Feb 20 17:05:10 CST 2012 i686 GNU/Linux 00:52:24 up 179 days, 12:21, 1 user, load average: 0.03, 0.09, 0.07 (Wow, 6 months already? Time for me to build a new kernel) AFAIK Debian experimental kernels are built to work with the experimental ecosystem, not the testing ecosystem. So it may be better to build a vanilla kernel on the testing box in question. One big advantage to rolling from source is you can build all firmware into the kernel image, including any/all non-free firmware images included in vanilla source. I always build firmware into the kernel. Avoids many potential headaches, especially for those using Realtek NICs. -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/503b0df7.9010...@hardwarefreak.com
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On 8/26/2012 7:44 PM, Alex Robbins wrote: need something more recent than testing Why? IIRC you previously mentioned you *needed* 3.3 or higher. Can you tell use what feature it is you need that was introduced in 3.3? not asking which of the above options is stable and secure (I know it is neither), Correct. It's a kernel, not an entire distro. Debian changes very little, if any, kernel code, for its distributed kernels. As with any distro, Debian sets various configuration options and excludes certain kernel features from its kernels, such as all the non-free bits of the vanilla source. Debian makes no changes to the vanilla kernel that make it more or less stable or secure. Note that the Debian kernel team is one of the largest contributors to upstream source. Thus when Debian pulls vanilla source into experimental, they're receiving all of their own recent kernel patches to the stable branch. but which will most likely yield better results; in other words, which would generally be more stable and more secure. The answer is again neither for the reasons I stated above. These are kernels, not applications. Again, I'm curious as to what 3.3+ kernel feature it is you require. -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/503b12c7.9080...@hardwarefreak.com
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On 27.8.2012 6:32, Joe Pfeiffer wrote: That will get him the latest kernel for his particular distribution (testing, wheezy, etc). The current kernel for either testing or unstable is 3.2; the current for experimental is 3.4; the current at kernel.org is 3.5. http://packages.debian.org/experimental/linux-image-3.5-trunk-amd64 Experimental has 3.5 (works ok in my laptop, EFI STUB boot). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/503b46d8.2080...@pp.nic.fi
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 16:51:54 -0500, Alex Robbins wrote: I am running Debian testing, which currently has kernel 3.2.23-1, same as unstable. experimental has 3.5.something. I am looking to run kernel version 3.3 or higher. As I understand it, there are 2 ways to go about this. I could build from the kernel.org source, or I could install from unstable. You mean from experimental, right? Which is more likely to yield better results, as far as stability, security, etc.? Using Debian kernel sources are usually the best/easier way and not for nothing special but it will save you a bunch of time (and some headaches) for generating a proper .config file. But hey, you can try both methods and then choose by yourself :-) If I were to go with a vanilla kernel, would it be best to just go with 3.3, or would it make sense to take 3.5? 3.5.3 is now the stable branch, I would go for that unless something impedes you from doing so. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/k1ftm1$9nj$6...@ger.gmane.org
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
Pertti Kosunen pertti.kosu...@pp.nic.fi writes: On 27.8.2012 6:32, Joe Pfeiffer wrote: That will get him the latest kernel for his particular distribution (testing, wheezy, etc). The current kernel for either testing or unstable is 3.2; the current for experimental is 3.4; the current at kernel.org is 3.5. http://packages.debian.org/experimental/linux-image-3.5-trunk-amd64 Experimental has 3.5 (works ok in my laptop, EFI STUB boot). Don't know why that didn't turn up when I looked for it last night... you're right. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1boblws4k8@pfeifferfamily.net
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 01:25:11 -0500 Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com wrote: On 8/26/2012 7:44 PM, Alex Robbins wrote: need something more recent than testing Why? IIRC you previously mentioned you *needed* 3.3 or higher. Can you tell use what feature it is you need that was introduced in 3.3? not asking which of the above options is stable and secure (I know it is neither), Correct. It's a kernel, not an entire distro. Debian changes very little, if any, kernel code, for its distributed kernels. As with any Debian definitely *does* change *some* kernel code: The source from which the Debian binary kernels are built is obtained by taking the source from linux_version.orig.tar.xz (that is, pristine kernel source with problematic parts removed) and applying a set of Debian patches. These patches typically implement essential fixes for serious bugs and security holes. The Debian version of the kernel packages has the form version-revision where version is the upstream version of the kernel (like 3.2.20) and revision determines the patchlevel. For example, the packages with version 3.2.20-1 are built from the linux_3.2.20.orig.tar.xz source, patched up to patchlevel. Certain packages include extra 'featuresets' not included in the upstream source, such as rt. http://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-source.html distro, Debian sets various configuration options and excludes certain kernel features from its kernels, such as all the non-free bits of the vanilla source. Debian makes no changes to the vanilla kernel that make it more or less stable or secure. Note that the Debian kernel team is one of the largest contributors to upstream source. Thus when Debian pulls vanilla source into experimental, they're receiving all of their own recent kernel patches to the stable branch. I don't think this is quite true; while there is an explicit preference for patches that have already been accepted upstream, it seems that this is not a rigid rule: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernelPatchAcceptanceGuidelines Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120827145400.44be663f.cele...@gmail.com
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On 08/27/2012 08:45 AM, Camaleón wrote: On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 16:51:54 -0500, Alex Robbins wrote: I am running Debian testing, which currently has kernel 3.2.23-1, same as unstable. experimental has 3.5.something. I am looking to run kernel version 3.3 or higher. As I understand it, there are 2 ways to go about this. I could build from the kernel.org source, or I could install from unstable. You mean from experimental, right? Which is more likely to yield better results, as far as stability, security, etc.? Using Debian kernel sources are usually the best/easier way and not for nothing special but it will save you a bunch of time (and some headaches) for generating a proper .config file. But hey, you can try both methods and then choose by yourself :-) If I were to go with a vanilla kernel, would it be best to just go with 3.3, or would it make sense to take 3.5? 3.5.3 is now the stable branch, I would go for that unless something impedes you from doing so. Greetings, Yes, I did mean experimental. Thanks for your answers, I think that I'll install from the experimental repo. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/503bc796.3010...@gmail.com
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 19:39:42 -0400 Gary Dale garyd...@rogers.com wrote: ... Experimental kernels are probably better than downloading the source from kernel.org and compiling it. At least some attempt is made to make it work in the Debian ecosystem. As Stan points out in another message in this thread, there's not much in the way of changes between vanilla and Debian kernels, and I don't think there will generally be any problem at all in running vanilla ones in the Debian ecosystem. I generally do, and rarely, if ever, experience problems due to a vanilla - Debian incompatibility. Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120827153116.5cc3ec94.cele...@gmail.com
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 01:04:39 -0500 Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com wrote: On 8/26/2012 6:39 PM, Gary Dale wrote: Experimental kernels are probably better than downloading the source from kernel.org and compiling it. I disagree. I've been running late model vanilla kernels with Stable for many years without issue. Currently I'm running vanilla 3.2.6 w/Squeeze since shortly after kernel.org released 3.2.6 as stable, on one box almost exactly 6 months ago: Linux greer 3.2.6 #1 SMP Mon Feb 20 17:05:10 CST 2012 i686 GNU/Linux 00:52:24 up 179 days, 12:21, 1 user, load average: 0.03, 0.09, 0.07 (Wow, 6 months already? Time for me to build a new kernel) What do you do about security? 3.2.x is already up to .28 - do you track security discussions vigilantly to ensure that you aren't vulnerable to anything that's been caught since then? Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120827153857.d74dbeca.cele...@gmail.com
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On Mon, 2012-08-27 at 15:31 -0400, Celejar wrote: On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 19:39:42 -0400 Gary Dale garyd...@rogers.com wrote: ... Experimental kernels are probably better than downloading the source from kernel.org and compiling it. At least some attempt is made to make it work in the Debian ecosystem. As Stan points out in another message in this thread, there's not much in the way of changes between vanilla and Debian kernels, and I don't think there will generally be any problem at all in running vanilla ones in the Debian ecosystem. I generally do, and rarely, if ever, experience problems due to a vanilla - Debian incompatibility. I often build vanilla + patch-rt. Usually I copy the Debian's default kernel config, change some settings to fit to rt needs and then run make oldconfig. If the OP doesn't need a patch, then copying the default kernel config and simply running make oldconfig should work without issues. IIRC the OP needs a kernel 3.5, in VBox I run Fedora 17 with a kernel 3.5.2 and it seems to be stable. I can't imagine why a kernel 3.5 should cause issues for Debian. Regards, Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1346096828.1286.7.camel@localhost.localdomain
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On Mon, 2012-08-27 at 15:38 -0400, Celejar wrote: On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 01:04:39 -0500 Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com wrote: On 8/26/2012 6:39 PM, Gary Dale wrote: Experimental kernels are probably better than downloading the source from kernel.org and compiling it. I disagree. I've been running late model vanilla kernels with Stable for many years without issue. Currently I'm running vanilla 3.2.6 w/Squeeze since shortly after kernel.org released 3.2.6 as stable, on one box almost exactly 6 months ago: Linux greer 3.2.6 #1 SMP Mon Feb 20 17:05:10 CST 2012 i686 GNU/Linux 00:52:24 up 179 days, 12:21, 1 user, load average: 0.03, 0.09, 0.07 (Wow, 6 months already? Time for me to build a new kernel) What do you do about security? 3.2.x is already up to .28 - do you track security discussions vigilantly to ensure that you aren't vulnerable to anything that's been caught since then? Now and again I run a kernel 2.6, connected to the Internet for hours, no firewall. This old Linux install even in 2012 never was corrupted. Not recommendable, however Linux isn't Windows, regarding to the security needs, e.g. not a server, just a desktop PC, it's still relatively secure. 2 Cents, Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1346097345.1286.12.camel@localhost.localdomain
Obtaining a Newer Kernel
I am running Debian testing, which currently has kernel 3.2.23-1, same as unstable. experimental has 3.5.something. I am looking to run kernel version 3.3 or higher. As I understand it, there are 2 ways to go about this. I could build from the kernel.org source, or I could install from unstable. Which is more likely to yield better results, as far as stability, security, etc.? If I were to go with a vanilla kernel, would it be best to just go with 3.3, or would it make sense to take 3.5? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/503a9a7a.20...@gmail.com
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On 26/08/12 05:51 PM, Alex Robbins wrote: I am running Debian testing, which currently has kernel 3.2.23-1, same as unstable. experimental has 3.5.something. I am looking to run kernel version 3.3 or higher. As I understand it, there are 2 ways to go about this. I could build from the kernel.org source, or I could install from unstable. Which is more likely to yield better results, as far as stability, security, etc.? If I were to go with a vanilla kernel, would it be best to just go with 3.3, or would it make sense to take 3.5? I'm confused. You said that unstable has the same version as testing, so installing from SID wouldn't get you anything. If you are looking for stability and security, stay with stable. If you NEED something newer that is still reasonably stable, go with testing and accept the tradeoffs that implies. Going with anything newer is not compatible with stable and secure. Stuff that hasn't made it into testing yet is NOT recommended except for experimentation. Experimental kernels are probably better than downloading the source from kernel.org and compiling it. At least some attempt is made to make it work in the Debian ecosystem. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/503ab3be.10...@rogers.com
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On 08/26/2012 06:39 PM, Gary Dale wrote: I'm confused. You said that unstable has the same version as testing, so installing from SID wouldn't get you anything. You're right, it wouldn't. I misspoke. I meant to say, or I could install from *experimental* If you are looking for stability and security, stay with stable. If you NEED something newer that is still reasonably stable, go with testing and accept the tradeoffs that implies. Going with anything newer is not compatible with stable and secure. Stuff that hasn't made it into testing yet is NOT recommended except for experimentation. Yes, I have always stayed with testing, as it provides a blend of stability/security and recentness that has been perfect for me. However, I do need something more recent than testing (and, as is the case, unstable). So I'm not asking which of the above options is stable and secure (I know it is neither), but which will most likely yield better results; in other words, which would generally be more stable and more secure. Experimental kernels are probably better than downloading the source from kernel.org and compiling it. At least some attempt is made to make it work in the Debian ecosystem. Thank you. P.S. Sorry for the lack of line wrapping in my last message. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/503ac2f7.30...@gmail.com
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 00:00:01 +0200 Alex Robbins alexdotrobb...@gmail.com wrote: As I understand it, there are 2 ways to go about this. I could build from the kernel.org source, or I could install from unstable. or you could install: linux-headers-amd64 linux-image-amd64 this would insure you always had the latest kernel and headers. Your architecture may be different so you might want to look to that in regard to my examples. -- CK -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aa05gqff4...@mid.individual.net
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On 08/26/2012 09:48 PM, Charles Kroeger wrote: or you could install: linux-headers-amd64 linux-image-amd64 this would insure you always had the latest kernel and headers. Your architecture may be different so you might want to look to that in regard to my examples. This does not at all answer my question. (And I already have linux-image-amd64 installed.) The first paragraph of the original email: I am running Debian testing, which currently has kernel 3.2.23-1, same as unstable. experimental has 3.5.something. I am looking to run kernel version 3.3 or higher. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/503ae5cd.4000...@gmail.com
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On Monday 27,August,2012 11:13 AM, Alex Robbins wrote: On 08/26/2012 09:48 PM, Charles Kroeger wrote: or you could install: linux-headers-amd64 linux-image-amd64 this would insure you always had the latest kernel and headers. Your architecture may be different so you might want to look to that in regard to my examples. This does not at all answer my question. (And I already have linux-image-amd64 installed.) The first paragraph of the original email: I am running Debian testing, which currently has kernel 3.2.23-1, same as unstable. experimental has 3.5.something. I am looking to run kernel version 3.3 or higher. Here is what I did, 1] Download the latest stable from kernel.org 2] copy old .config from currently working one Here is one link, recommended by someone from list to me before. http://andreas.goelzer.de/kernel-config-based-on-lsmod-output and then run configure and make-kpkg Frankly speaking, in the past several kernel I tried, even though I do believe it's built very blindly, but overall it works. For the security reason you concerned, I don't know, but stability are very well. Best regards, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/503ae9ec.1020...@gmail.com
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
On 27/08/12 05:30, lina wrote: On Monday 27,August,2012 11:13 AM, Alex Robbins wrote: On 08/26/2012 09:48 PM, Charles Kroeger wrote: or you could install: linux-headers-amd64 linux-image-amd64 this would insure you always had the latest kernel and headers. Your architecture may be different so you might want to look to that in regard to my examples. This does not at all answer my question. (And I already have linux-image-amd64 installed.) The first paragraph of the original email: I am running Debian testing, which currently has kernel 3.2.23-1, same as unstable. experimental has 3.5.something. I am looking to run kernel version 3.3 or higher. Here is what I did, 1] Download the latest stable from kernel.org 2] copy old .config from currently working one Here is one link, recommended by someone from list to me before. http://andreas.goelzer.de/kernel-config-based-on-lsmod-output and then run configure and make-kpkg more precisely: make oldconfig make-kpkg ... Frankly speaking, in the past several kernel I tried, even though I do believe it's built very blindly, but overall it works. For the security reason you concerned, I don't know, but stability are very well. Best regards, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/503aea93.1020...@rezozer.net
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
Charles Kroeger ckro...@frankensteinface.com writes: On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 00:00:01 +0200 Alex Robbins alexdotrobb...@gmail.com wrote: As I understand it, there are 2 ways to go about this. I could build from the kernel.org source, or I could install from unstable. or you could install: linux-headers-amd64 linux-image-amd64 this would insure you always had the latest kernel and headers. Your architecture may be different so you might want to look to that in regard to my examples. That will get him the latest kernel for his particular distribution (testing, wheezy, etc). The current kernel for either testing or unstable is 3.2; the current for experimental is 3.4; the current at kernel.org is 3.5. So far as I can tell, he can install from experimental to get 3.4, or build from source to get 3.5 (or build from source to get a 3.6 release candidate). I used to build all my own kernels, but have gotten lazier and lazier. I missed exactly what's been added in the latest kernels that he wants; unless there's something he explicitly needs from something later I'd stick with testing (which, in my experience, has always been rock-solid); I used to run unstable, but got burned by a few updates that left me unbootable. Of course, if his actual goal is to be a guinea pig, experimental is the way to go! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1by5l1rouu@pfeifferfamily.net
Re: Obtaining a Newer Kernel
Charles Kroeger ckro...@frankensteinface.com writes: On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 00:00:01 +0200 Alex Robbins alexdotrobb...@gmail.com wrote: As I understand it, there are 2 ways to go about this. I could build from the kernel.org source, or I could install from unstable. or you could install: linux-headers-amd64 linux-image-amd64 this would insure you always had the latest kernel and headers. Your architecture may be different so you might want to look to that in regard to my examples. That will get him the latest kernel for his particular distribution (testing, wheezy, etc). The current kernel for either testing or unstable is 3.2; the current for experimental is 3.4; the current at kernel.org is 3.5. So far as I can tell, he can install from experimental to get 3.4, or build from source to get 3.5 (or build from source to get a 3.6 release candidate). I used to build all my own kernels, but have gotten lazier and lazier. I missed exactly what's been added in the latest kernels that he wants; unless there's something he explicitly needs from something later I'd stick with testing (which, in my experience, has always been rock-solid); I used to run unstable, but got burned by a few updates that left me unbootable. Of course, if his actual goal is to be a guinea pig, experimental is the way to go! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1bwr0lroto@pfeifferfamily.net
