http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/item/5583/
2. Many of the driver updates/new drivers in the kernel-ubuntu package are merged into upstream as of 2.6.25. (This is always true, but the smaller the delta against upstream the better on release day).

3. Fedora 9 is based on 2.6.25 which means that key RH kernel developers are aggressively working to get the feature and performance/scalability regressions vs. 2.6.18 & 22 fixed.

4. The kgdb patch will probably be merged at the start of the 2.6.26 cycle which means the delta vs. 2.6.25 kernel should be pretty manageable. This would be really valuable from an LTS ongoing perspective.

5. The RT patch will be better maintained (and smaller) against 2.6.25. (see #3)

6. Better virtualization and SELinux support (see #3).

Given the life-cycle of an LTS release (especially this one which will finally have a meaningful chance to enter the data center) these considerations are especially important.

Obviously 2.6.25 would have to be in addition to 2.6.24 for the Hardy 8.04 LTS release time-frame, but it does allow the aforementioned benefits to be propagated forward.

[370 votes] Solution #1: Auto-generated solution of idea #5583


]]> en-us Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:26:56 +0000 Fri, 23 Oct 2009 08:01:58 +0000 QAPoll module http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/5583/ Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:25:42 +0000 As you pointed out, it's too late in the cycle to drop the 2.6.24 by default.]]> Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:43:41 +0000 Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:31:57 +0000 Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:08:43 +0000
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardyReleaseSchedule]]> Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:11:41 +0000 In Hardy-proposed or something.]]> Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:14:03 +0000 Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:21:46 +0000 +1]]> Mon, 24 Mar 2008 20:41:59 +0000
RH pays lots of important kernel hackers. If 2.6.25 is going to be the base of a Fedora release, then Ubuntu might save a lot work on the kernel in the future by taking that route.]]> Mon, 24 Mar 2008 22:13:52 +0000 Mon, 24 Mar 2008 22:36:48 +0000 I suggest we ship with 2.6.24, then have 2.6.25 in repository under hardy-proposed.]]> Tue, 25 Mar 2008 01:49:55 +0000 Tue, 25 Mar 2008 06:46:21 +0000 Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:20:58 +0000
having said that, your list of advantages for the funky weasel kernel is very interesting, so it would be great if 2.6.25 were available in the repositories
]]> Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:24:18 +0000 Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:41:08 +0000
I am testing several Os: hardy 2.6.24, suse 2.6.25, fedora 2.6.25 and i can say that 2.6.25 is a best one

with 2.6.25 we have better Hal performance

So, i hope Hardy coming with 2.6.25 as soon as possible.

Thanks]]> Sat, 29 Mar 2008 10:28:11 +0000 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:17:32 +0000 Sun, 06 Apr 2008 21:13:53 +0000 Mon, 07 Apr 2008 07:56:23 +0000 Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:28:06 +0000 When using 3d applications (blender,k3d,all/any first-person-shooter games) there is a complete system lockup which can only be fixed by pulling the plug.
This being in Hardy is critical.

http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14937

]]> Wed, 09 Apr 2008 20:43:10 +0000
http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Kernel/2008-02/msg12842.html]]> Thu, 10 Apr 2008 03:06:58 +0000 Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:39:33 +0000
Wondering whats new? Check...
* http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_25

I would really like to see it in the hardy-proposed or hardy-backports in the repository.]]> Thu, 17 Apr 2008 22:24:20 +0000 Sat, 19 Apr 2008 19:00:24 +0000
Like it happen with Dapper if Canonical only does security updates and not new version updates not only for the kernel but also for drivers, firefox, openoffice, gimp, etc... then it's silly to maintain a distro for three and five years.

Think about it, how many people or companies use dapper today?

So it's very important to make available the 2.6.25 kernel, but also the new versions that as time goes by will be released if they improve the old one.

Remember, we are talking about a LONG TIME support release.]]> Thu, 24 Apr 2008 21:41:02 +0000 Fri, 09 May 2008 17:53:22 +0000 Wed, 14 May 2008 07:32:51 +0000 Tue, 03 Jun 2008 07:37:44 +0000
2.6.24 has very big problems leading to lockups and hard freezes on many computers.
For reference, see the long discussion on the forums at http://ohioloco.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=768200
or http://ph.ubuntuforums.com/showthread.php?s=f0a7e1e71fc8753bf83472f31604107e&t=765510
or the many bug reports such as https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/204996 and the tens duplicate thereof.

2.6.25 is said not to have such issues.

Also, 2.6.25 is the fedora 9 kernel. Using the same kernel as fedora would mean that bugs can be fixed faster, because there is a larger userbase and no need to identify the precise bits causing problems to backport solutions to a former kernel. So, even if 2.6.25 could not fix right now the above bug, moving to it would be a win anyway.

Wasn't the Ubuntu founder the big supporter of "distribution syncronisation"? This is a situation where using the same kernel version could really help.

So, please make 2.6.25 available for hardy asap.]]> Sun, 08 Jun 2008 22:26:01 +0000 Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:43:37 +0000 Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:05:21 +0000
Hardy is therefore a DEAD release.

]]> Fri, 04 Jul 2008 16:20:05 +0000 much wider and wiser decision which kernel to use.
Current situations is a little bit like a own goal in soccer!
2.6.24 isn't solid for LTS release!
]]> Sun, 06 Jul 2008 20:10:32 +0000