Projects / Linux / Comments

Comments for Linux

11 Feb 2002 03:36 sinisa

i2o support broken in kernel > 2.4.10
Has anybody else noticed this?

I have an Intel SRCU-31 i2o based RAID adapter, and I cannot make it work in any kernel since 2.4.10, neither as a module nor a built-in driver.
Kernel just oops-es on startup.

Up to 2.4.10 i2o worked fine, but ABI support was broken for my dual P!!!, now ABI-patch works fine in 2.4.17, but i2o isn't :(

28 Nov 2001 05:25 styxern

Re: Kernel security

> I wonder why patches like openwall or
> grsecurity are not integrated into
> standard kernel. Don't bother with back
> compatibility! I'm using 2.4.16 +
> grsecurity patch on production server
> (Apache, Postfix, Cucipop, PostgreSQL,
> Squid) and I must admit it is very
> stable and more secure than 2.4.16
> kernel itself. Kernel deveopers, please
> - put those patches into kernel and good
> times for Linux will begin.

Well, I don't think enough of the code is "standard" enough, and some of the features are crudely implemented. Take a look at grsecurity's changelog, quite a lot of bugfixes. I think that if they are going to implement security patches like that, the code had to been cleaner, less intrusive, and more stable.

27 Nov 2001 01:08 gauze

Re: Kernel security

> I wonder why patches like openwall or
> grsecurity are not integrated into
> standard kernel. Don't bother with back
> compatibility! I'm using 2.4.16 +
> grsecurity patch on production server
> (Apache, Postfix, Cucipop, PostgreSQL,
> Squid) and I must admit it is very
> stable and more secure than 2.4.16
> kernel itself. Kernel deveopers, please
> - put those patches into kernel and good
> times for Linux will begin.

I'd assume because of crypto import/export issues, not all countries have the same laws. Also, 2.4.16 is only released today, how can you tell if it's stable? I am still running 2.4.9 w/ 86.5 day uptime and I'd hesitate to call that stable even.

26 Nov 2001 14:12 TomekLutel

Kernel security
I wonder why patches like openwall or grsecurity are not integrated into standard kernel. Don't bother with back compatibility! I'm using 2.4.16 + grsecurity patch on production server (Apache, Postfix, Cucipop, PostgreSQL, Squid) and I must admit it is very stable and more secure than 2.4.16 kernel itself. Kernel deveopers, please - put those patches into kernel and good times for Linux will begin.

02 Nov 2001 21:09 fredlwm

Re: /proc/meminfo - "cached" value weird in 2.4.13-ac5
This is the wrong place to report it, but yes, others reported (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=100470676801233&w=2) the same problem.

02 Nov 2001 19:57 bernisys

/proc/meminfo - "cached" value weird in 2.4.13-ac5
total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached:
Mem: 261554176 244891648 16662528 131072 133689344 18446744073638670336

Cached: 4294898076 kB

this seems not right to me ;) ...
I recently upgraded from 2.4.9 to 2.2.13-ac5, since then i get these strange high values for the "Cached memory" item. Has anybody encountered similar problems ?

14 Oct 2001 21:01 oldpink

Uhmmm...Floppy support is broken for Linux-2.4.12-ac1
I just wanted to mention that somehow or other, this patch of Linux, while being useful in correcting the parport compilation bug in plain 2.4.12, has broken floppy drive (at least MSDOS/VFAT) support. Using "mdir" gives me this error:

Can't open /dev/fd0: Device not configured
Cannot initialize 'A:'

17 Sep 2001 07:54 Hattig

Hilarious reason for release:
"This is just a resync as various people work to get most of
-ac into Linus"

Really? Must be painful for Linus.

28 Aug 2001 10:22 asa

hi
linux is cool

04 Jun 2001 18:30 jjackson

Re: Linux 2.4.5 and Freeswan 1.9 broke

> Linux 2.4.5 and Freeswan 1.9 is
> broken.


Here is a patch to make FreeSwan 1.9 work with
2.4.4... I have also gotten it to work just fine
with 2.4.5.

http://lists.freeswan.org/pipermail/bugs/2001-May/000004.html

Screenshot

Project Spotlight

ReciJournal

An open, cross-platform journaling program.

Screenshot

Project Spotlight

Veusz

A scientific plotting package.