# Why can't kernel.org keep a newer kernel stable?

## 1clue

It seems like a long time now, that the stable kernels have been bouncing between something newer and something I consider pretty ancient. What's up with that?

I feel like I'm getting whiplash.

Yet another upgrade and it's 4.14 again?

I can't remember a time when they've had such trouble keeping a stable kernel on the same major branch. Or is it that I want features in newer kernels and the repo keeps loading this old crap on me over and over?

I know it's not anyone's fault here, I'm just expressing my angst. And I don't understand why it's been happening so long. I mean I can read like anyone else, but WTF?

----------

## Muso

According to kernel.org the latest stable is 4.19.4 and long term is 4.14.83.

Is it the gentoo stable you're referring to?

----------

## fedeliallalinea

As Muso say if you are in a stable system latest kernel available is LTS (which for a stable system seems to me to be a good policy) that which to this day is 4.14.x.

You you are in a stable system and you want latest kernel use package.accept_keywords

----------

## asturm

Gentoo Kernel team does not stabilise non-LTS versions.

----------

## 1clue

What I'd like to do is follow kernel.org's stable but in gentoo-sources, when it comes out.

----------

## NeddySeagoon

1clue,

That's always testing gentoo-sources, or am I missing something.

I don't tend to follow minor kernel revisions, unless something is broken.

----------

## Marcih

 *NeddySeagoon wrote:*   

> I don't tend to follow minor kernel revisions, unless something is broken.

 

Do you mean you don't tend to update when a minor kernel revision comes out? Do you run kernel.org stable or Gentoo stable (or something else)?

I'm asking because I'd like to know whether there's even any point in upgrading from 4.14.65 to 4.14.78 to 4.14.82 to 4.14.83 is the span of a couple of months (the last three in a few weeks and the last two in a couple of days). As far as I'm aware, LTS only gets security fixes backported and the Gentoo Kernel team stabilised new minor releases fairly sparsely; last time we had such a stabilisation "flurry" was l1tf.

Are we currently in a similar situation where a new vuln is being patched and we should therefore always be on latest stable ASAP?

----------

## Anon-E-moose

 *NeddySeagoon wrote:*   

> I don't tend to follow minor kernel revisions, unless something is broken.

 

I don't normally do that either, I've even run kernels after they've quit being updated, simply because they work with no problems on my machine.

I did update from 4.14.44 -> 52 -> 62 but I'll probably stay on 4.14.62 for a while. (I have the patches for up to .78 but haven't seen the need to apply them.)

Note: I do glance at the patches to see if there is something that might apply to my hardware and then I might or might not update at that time, depends on how critical it is.

----------

## 1clue

 *Marcih wrote:*   

>  *NeddySeagoon wrote:*   I don't tend to follow minor kernel revisions, unless something is broken. 
> 
> Do you mean you don't tend to update when a minor kernel revision comes out? Do you run kernel.org stable or Gentoo stable (or something else)?
> 
> I'm asking because I'd like to know whether there's even any point in upgrading from 4.14.65 to 4.14.78 to 4.14.82 to 4.14.83 is the span of a couple of months (the last three in a few weeks and the last two in a couple of days). As far as I'm aware, LTS only gets security fixes backported and the Gentoo Kernel team stabilised new minor releases fairly sparsely; last time we had such a stabilisation "flurry" was l1tf.
> ...

 

You should see what the difference is between your kernel and the latest one, and decide if you need that change. If you don't know even after a web search, you could ask or you could just update.

My issue is 4.14 doesn't have features I want, or I would just accept the gentoo stable kernel. That, and even before I saw the need to get a newer kernel, they kept pushing out a new kernel and then removing it, causing a revert to an older kernel. Then a newer one, then back again.

----------

## 1clue

For years my Gentoo box got a new kernel every few months. This last year, it seems I've seen 3 a week come through at times.

----------

## Muso

 *1clue wrote:*   

>  *Marcih wrote:*    *NeddySeagoon wrote:*   I don't tend to follow minor kernel revisions, unless something is broken. 
> 
> Do you mean you don't tend to update when a minor kernel revision comes out? Do you run kernel.org stable or Gentoo stable (or something else)?
> 
> I'm asking because I'd like to know whether there's even any point in upgrading from 4.14.65 to 4.14.78 to 4.14.82 to 4.14.83 is the span of a couple of months (the last three in a few weeks and the last two in a couple of days). As far as I'm aware, LTS only gets security fixes backported and the Gentoo Kernel team stabilised new minor releases fairly sparsely; last time we had such a stabilisation "flurry" was l1tf.
> ...

 

If you use the ~amd64 version of the gentoo-sources you will be up to date within a day or two from kernel.org's releases.

----------

## Anon-E-moose

 *1clue wrote:*   

> My issue is 4.14 doesn't have features I want, or I would just accept the gentoo stable kernel. 

 

I've kind of been waiting for Greg to "declare" a new LTS before I update, I kind of expected that for 4.19 but no luck. Maybe 4.20 when it stabilizes.

ETA:

 *Quote:*   

> the LTSI (Long-Term Support Initiative) community reached out to Greg Kroah-Hartman to know what the next LTS Linux kernel series will be.
> 
> And the answer is yes, the upcoming Linux 4.19 kernel will be an LTS (Long Term Support) series, 

 

Maybe, I'm wrong on my initial post, but kernel.org still doesn't show 4.19 as LTS.

----------

## fedeliallalinea

 *Anon-E-moose wrote:*   

> Maybe, I'm wrong on my initial post, but kernel.org still doesn't show 4.19 as LTS.

 

https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html

----------

## Anon-E-moose

 *fedeliallalinea wrote:*   

>  *Anon-E-moose wrote:*   Maybe, I'm wrong on my initial post, but kernel.org still doesn't show 4.19 as LTS. 
> 
> https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html

 

Yeah when I said that, I was just glancing at the front page where it's still listed as stable. 

I'll probably let it get a few more rev levels ( 6-8 ) and then switch to it.

----------

## fedeliallalinea

 *Anon-E-moose wrote:*   

> Yeah when I said that, I was just glancing at the front page where it's still listed as stable. 
> 
> I'll probably let it get a few more rev levels ( 6-8 ) and then switch to it.

 

Sorry, now I understand

@1clue: what is the problem to adding gentoo-sources in package.accept_keywords?

----------

## Anon-E-moose

1clue, I don't even bother with letting portage handle the kernel, I decide which I want and just download and compile it.

And you could always copy whichever one you wanted to local, that way it's there even if they do the hokey-pokey shuffle.   :Laughing: 

I've been using the zen series, even after they quit keeping up with ebuilds.

----------

## 1clue

@fedeliallalinea There really isn't a problem, except for the "hokey pokey shuffle" which seems to be happening even on stable these days.

I want a relatively recent kernel, but I hate having somebody "undo" the kernel I just built. 

@Anon-E-moose I used to do that (download directly from kernel.org), maybe it's time to do that again.

Years back I didn't pay much attention to bug fixes unless they caused my system to crash. These days I need to pay attention not only to system stability but also features present and security issues. My Linux experience is a bit less relaxed than it used to be.

----------

## asturm

This is really confusing here, are you talking about

 *1clue wrote:*   

> @fedeliallalinea There really isn't a problem, except for the "hokey pokey shuffle" which seems to be happening even on stable these days.

 

kernel.org upstream now (their pace at pushing out new releases is really fast these days)

 *1clue wrote:*   

> I want a relatively recent kernel, but I hate having somebody "undo" the kernel I just built.

 

or rather Gentoo kernel team here? If that's just about some kernel version you use being dropped from portage after n weeks, why care? You've built it, the sources are there and stay there unless you remove them. Of course kernel.org always says you 'must' upgrade, and doing so within one major branch is also relatively easy using make oldconfig.

----------

## 1clue

 *asturm wrote:*   

> This is really confusing here, are you talking about
> 
>  *1clue wrote:*   @fedeliallalinea There really isn't a problem, except for the "hokey pokey shuffle" which seems to be happening even on stable these days. 
> 
> kernel.org upstream now (their pace at pushing out new releases is really fast these days)
> ...

 

I guess I'm just being a whiny user. I don't know whose fault it is, I don't even particularly care.

More importantly, I'm not asking anyone at Gentoo to do anything. I know that Gentoo is a consumer of the kernel and almost everything else in the Gentoo repositories. I know how upstream works.

I know how agile programming works, I'm a programmer and we use agile techniques. 

However I believe that agile techniques can be taken too far. News of a new kernel used to be a huge deal. Now it's almost anti-news, suitable for your spam folder. Updates (and news of them) should come out often enough to address serious concerns, and rarely enough that people feel willing to actually read the changelog, even if it's just a digest. Once a month is fine, thrice a week is not. At least when you're talking about the Linux kernel and a global audience.

----------

## asturm

Well, it is almost as if the in-between LTS kernel versions are the new development kernels. Early minors more so than double-digits, but even those were not safe during the spectre/meltdown turmoil and more than one revert...

----------

## 1clue

I'd like to reiterate that I'm not being critical of the Gentoo people. I just had yet another automatic download of a kernel I don't want and got frustrated. I don't build every kernel that gets downloaded, I just wish the version numbers would increment rather than decrement.

----------

## asturm

Just put =sys-kernel/<your-sources>-4.<your-preferred-series>* into package.accept_keywords then? You'll only get updates, until the whole series is dropped from portage. And then you pay attention to the update plan of emerge --ask, of course.

----------

## dmpogo

 *asturm wrote:*   

> Gentoo Kernel team does not stabilise non-LTS versions.

 

We should add here that this is a fairly new policy.    It was not the case when kernels were in 3.x family or before

----------

## fedeliallalinea

 *dmpogo wrote:*   

> We should add here that this is a fairly new policy.    It was not the case when kernels were in 3.x family or before

 

Also because before 3.2 there was no official LTS for kernel

----------

