• boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    These messages are damn useless

    Distros take care of the kernel, either ship LTS releases or do the backports themselves. Only rolling release people run that kernel.

    So this post is literally only useful for the 4 LFS users that now need to recompile their kernels.

        • nexussapphire@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Weren’t are nukes controlled by IBM series/1 systems and floppy discs until 2019. They said they upgraded to a highly secure solid state system. They might be still using those computers for some parts of the system because “You can’t hack something that doesn’t have an IP address. It’s a very unique system — it is old and it is very good.”

    • ryannathans@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I like to see what’s in the newer kernels and know to expect an update that might break my dkms modules in the near future

  • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Feels like Linux 4.20 wasn’t that long ago and we’re already at Linux 6.9? At this rate Sex 2 will release and it won’t even be exciting

    • davidgro@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      7 months ago

      It does feel that way, but…

      “Linux 4.20 was released on Sun, 23 Dec 2018”

      About 5.5 years.

      • rho50@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        7 months ago

        (6.9-4.2)/(2024-2018) = 0.45 “version increments” per year.

        4.2/(2018-1991) = 0.15 “version increments” per year.

        So, the pace of version increases in the past 6 years has been around triple the average from the previous 27 years, since Linux’ first release.

        I guess I can see why 6.9 would seem pretty dramatic for long-time Linux users.

        I wonder whether development has actually accelerated, or if this is just a change in the approach to the release/versioning process.

        • ozymandias117@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          7 months ago

          I wonder if development has actually accelerated, or if this is just a change in the approach to the release/versioning process

          Both.

          Development has increased, but you should use your comparison from the last 2.6 release.

          It stayed on 2.6.y for 8 years - that was where it got stable enough that there wasn’t some major milestone to use as a new marker for its update number

          There are cool new features, but if it followed the old versioning scheme, we’d still be on 2.6 because it hasn’t (intentionally) broken the API between the kernel and userspace

        • piexil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          7 months ago

          Since version 4.0 the version numbers have nothing to do with changes and are strictly time based. Linux 5.0 happened after Linux 4.20 because Linus “ran out of hands and toes to count on”, same thing with 6.0 after 5.19

          • ozymandias117@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Wait. He lost a finger or toe???

            Edit: more seriously it’s been since 3.0 after being on 2.6 forever

            there are no special landmark features or incompatibilities related to the version number change, it’s simply a way to drop an inconvenient numbering system

            It used to only get bumped after a major new feature update, but it was stable enough at 2.6 that it got stuck there for 8 years, so he switched to a different update number

  • theshatterstone54@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 months ago

    Is there any particular reason this is news? I thought that’s how most kernel updates went for the non-LTS releases. Or has something changed? What’s different compared to all other kernel updates in rolling releases?

    • Successful_Try543@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yes, usual releases are supported ~ 3 months, LTS versions get support for a much longer period e.g. 6.6 for 3 y, 6.1 for 4 y, 5.15 for 5 y or 5.10 for 6 y.