Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #198464 > unrolled thread

question about the kernel

Started bymick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com>
First post2018-08-09 09:20 +0200
Last post2018-08-13 16:20 +0200
Articles 9 — 7 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  question about the kernel mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2018-08-09 09:20 +0200
    Re: question about the kernel Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2018-08-09 11:20 +0200
      Re: question about the kernel davidson <davidson@freevolt.org> - 2018-08-09 14:50 +0200
        Re: question about the kernel Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2018-08-09 16:00 +0200
    Re: question about the kernel Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2018-08-09 11:30 +0200
    Re: question about the kernel songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2018-08-09 16:10 +0200
      Re: question about the kernel deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2018-08-10 01:10 +0200
        Re: Re: question about the kernel dekkzz78@gmail.com - 2018-08-13 12:00 +0200
          Re: Re: question about the kernel deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2018-08-13 16:20 +0200

#198464 — question about the kernel

Frommick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com>
Date2018-08-09 09:20 +0200
Subjectquestion about the kernel
Message-ID<wkNoK-pM-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Am I right in thinking that the kernel is a single codebase agreed 
between all the kernel developers at any particular date and that Linux 
distributions can take bits out from that for their release but 
shouldn't add bespoke stuff that isn't agreed by everybody else ?

just wondering how that works.

mick

-- 
Key ID    4BFEBB31

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#198466

FromReco <recoverym4n@gmail.com>
Date2018-08-09 11:20 +0200
Message-ID<wkPgR-1ws-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#198464
	Hi.

On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 08:15:42AM +0100, mick crane wrote:
> Am I right in thinking that the kernel is a single codebase agreed between
> all the kernel developers at any particular date

No. As [1] shows us, there's a mainline branch (aka to-be-released
kernel), stable branch (aka released kernel) and longterm support
branches.
Also, anyone can make their own fork of the kernel. To name the most
used ones there are RedHat's fork and OpenWRT's fork.


> and that Linux
> distributions can take bits out from that for their release

Every Linux distribution effectively maintains their own branch of
kernel, Debian included.
AFAIK Slackware is one of distributions that tries to to maintain the
least deviation from the upstream possible.


> but shouldn't
> add bespoke stuff that isn't agreed by everybody else ?

Tell that to RedHat, which single-handedly implemented their own special
way of signing the kernel and its modules (and which was not accepted by
upstream). Or Novell with their kgraft. Or Oracle with ksplice and dtrace.

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#198474

Fromdavidson <davidson@freevolt.org>
Date2018-08-09 14:50 +0200
Message-ID<wkSy5-3uV-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#198466

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, Reco wrote:

> 	Hi.
>
> On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 08:15:42AM +0100, mick crane wrote:
>> Am I right in thinking that the kernel is a single codebase agreed between
>> all the kernel developers at any particular date
>
> No. As [1] shows us, there's a mainline branch (aka to-be-released
> kernel), stable branch (aka released kernel) and longterm support
> branches.

For the record, I looked for the referent of "[1]", but couldn't find
any pointer in Reco's message or OP's.

So I made a wild guess and went to

  https://www.kernel.org/

There I saw the list of downloads on the front page:

| mainline:   4.18-rc8 
| stable:     4.17.14 
| longterm:   4.14.62 
| longterm:   4.9.119 
| longterm:   4.4.147 
| longterm:   3.18.118 [EOL] 
| longterm:   3.16.57 
| linux-next: next-20180809

I'm going update my CV now: "Accomplished mind reader"

-- 
Editor’s note: An earlier version of this article incorrectly included a tweet
by the International Organization for Standardization, which shares an acronym
with the International Socialist Organization. We regret the error.
conservativereview.com/news/chicago-international-socialist-organization-socialism-is-about-self-government/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#198480

FromReco <recoverym4n@gmail.com>
Date2018-08-09 16:00 +0200
Message-ID<wkTDP-48R-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#198474
	Hi.

On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 12:45:39PM +0000, davidson wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, Reco wrote:
> 
> > 	Hi.
> > 
> > On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 08:15:42AM +0100, mick crane wrote:
> > > Am I right in thinking that the kernel is a single codebase agreed between
> > > all the kernel developers at any particular date
> > 
> > No. As [1] shows us, there's a mainline branch (aka to-be-released
> > kernel), stable branch (aka released kernel) and longterm support
> > branches.
> 
> For the record, I looked for the referent of "[1]", but couldn't find
> any pointer in Reco's message or OP's.
> 
> So I made a wild guess and went to
> 
>  https://www.kernel.org/

I missed that link indeed. Thank you.


> There I saw the list of downloads on the front page:
> 
> | mainline:   4.18-rc8 | stable:     4.17.14 | longterm:   4.14.62 |
> longterm:   4.9.119 | longterm:   4.4.147 | longterm:   3.18.118 [EOL] |
> longterm:   3.16.57 | linux-next: next-20180809
> 
> I'm going update my CV now: "Accomplished mind reader"

:)

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#198469

FromDarac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk>
Date2018-08-09 11:30 +0200
Message-ID<wkPqy-1AM-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#198464

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 08:15:42AM +0100, mick crane wrote:
>Am I right in thinking that the kernel is a single codebase agreed 
>between all the kernel developers at any particular date and that 
>Linux distributions can take bits out from that for their release but 
>shouldn't add bespoke stuff that isn't agreed by everybody else ?
>
>just wondering how that works.
>
>mick
>

The kernel IS a single codebase. The definitive source for it is 
kernel.org and Linus et al combine the contributions from many sources 
into the code there.

In terms of modifying the code, the kernel is licensed under the GPL 
which, broadly speaking states "You may copy, distribute and modify 
the software as long as you track changes/dates in source files. Any 
modifications to or software including (via compiler) GPL-licensed 
code must also be made available under the GPL along with build & 
install instructions." (Courtesy of 
https://tldrlegal.com/license/gnu-general-public-license-v2). In 
practice, though, the kernel is very configurable and most distributions 
merely include or remove parts of the code by changing the configuration 
before compilation.

As for adding new code, there are two hurdles to getting that into the 
mainline kernel: it must be legally allowable as part of the kernel 
(e.g. Licensed under the GPL) and it must pass review (by the kernel 
maintainers). If you can't pass these hurdles, you can provide an 
out-of-kernel module (this is how things like Virtualbox, Wireguard and 
NVIDIA work). Your code is distributed separately, but includes the 
kernel headers and produces a kernel module which can be loaded. Doing 
this will TAINT the kernel, though (not necessarily a bad thing, but 
will alert developers to the fact that there may be issues).

-- 
For more information, please reread.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#198482

Fromsongbird <songbird@anthive.com>
Date2018-08-09 16:10 +0200
Message-ID<wkTNv-4si-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#198464
mick crane wrote:

> Am I right in thinking that the kernel is a single codebase agreed 
> between all the kernel developers at any particular date and that Linux 
> distributions can take bits out from that for their release but 
> shouldn't add bespoke stuff that isn't agreed by everybody else ?
>
> just wondering how that works.

  reading the main mailing list for a while will give 
you an idea, but these are the main starting points
for the kernel in general:

  https://www.kernel.org/
  https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/

  the debian processes are done via the kernel
team and so you can also follow that mailing list
(i read via gmane and usenet).


  songbird

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#198531

Fromdeloptes <deloptes@gmail.com>
Date2018-08-10 01:10 +0200
Message-ID<wl2e5-1fU-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#198482
songbird wrote:

> the debian processes are done via the kernel
> team and so you can also follow that mailing list
> (i read via gmane and usenet).

And you can always do "make deb-pkg" on the source and produce a ready for
use debian package

regards

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#198686

Fromdekkzz78@gmail.com
Date2018-08-13 12:00 +0200
Message-ID<wmhNL-4Fl-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#198531

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 08/10, deloptes wrote:
>songbird wrote:
>
>> the debian processes are done via the kernel
>> team and so you can also follow that mailing list
>> (i read via gmane and usenet).
>
>And you can always do "make deb-pkg" on the source and produce a ready for
>use debian package
>
>regards

How would i go about modifying the .config to enable n3fold in the kernel using make deb-pkg?

-- 
regards.....

Dekks Herton

Thinkpad T61 2.0Ghz 2GB WSXGA+

Jabber IM: dekkzz78@jabber.hot-chilli.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#198710

Fromdeloptes <deloptes@gmail.com>
Date2018-08-13 16:20 +0200
Message-ID<wmlRn-7ec-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#198686
dekkzz78@gmail.com wrote:

> On 08/10, deloptes wrote:
>>songbird wrote:
>>
>>> the debian processes are done via the kernel
>>> team and so you can also follow that mailing list
>>> (i read via gmane and usenet).
>>
>>And you can always do "make deb-pkg" on the source and produce a ready for
>>use debian package
>>
>>regards
> 
> How would i go about modifying the .config to enable n3fold in the kernel
> using make deb-pkg?
> 

Best way is
make menuconfig will open the .config (ncurses) and you can find your way to
the driver. You can also look at the documentation for more options
What is n3fold BTW?

regards

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web