If Dreams Were Real: Convergence of Distro and Kernel Versions
Mark Shuttleworth had a dream: the big Linux distros should agree to have version numbers identical to those of kernel components and refresh them every two years. The dream now is more real than ever.
In a lengthy 2008 blog (as we reported), Mark Shuttleworth outlined a plan for the most commonly used Linux distros (Debian, Ubuntu, Red Hat and SUSE) to agree to a two-to-three-year major release cycle. The sting: if they were to agree to a common version numbering, it would immensely simply the software and especially the driver development process. According to Shuttleworth, it would lead to a definite positive effect for all distros.
While Shuttleworth considers the biannual releases for LTS versions, the same regularity could be introduced for the Debian releases. The Enterprise distros of Red Hat and Novell could also follow the same pattern. Shuttleworth's suggestions were batted about quite heavily over the last summer among the Debian team, with the outcome that no common timetable with Ubuntu would be pursued: Debian will continue to be ready when it's ready.
However, after the Debian team announced the version numbers for the main components of their upcoming 6.0 "Squeeze" release, Shuttleworth's plan seemed to get some recognition after all. In his March 15 blog, he announced that Debian 6.0 and Ubuntu 10.04 were, in fact, using identical versions of the kernel, Python and Perl, GCC and OpenOffice. Even Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 and SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12 are likely to run kernel version 2.6.32, so that kernel developers are more willing to nurture it.
Even if this unique convergence were no more than coincidental, there's a great chance that it might have such a positive effect on individual distros to become a stimulus for common release cycles in the future. By current timetables, the chances for Ubuntu, Red Hat and SUSE Linux Enterprise are good in that Ubuntu is releasing semiannually and Red Hat and Novell are releasing on an eight-month cycle. The lowest common denominator therefore being 24 months gives credibility to Shuttleworth's "The Art of Release" theory.
Comments
comments powered by DisqusSubscribe to our Linux Newsletters
Find Linux and Open Source Jobs
Subscribe to our ADMIN Newsletters
Support Our Work
Linux Magazine content is made possible with support from readers like you. Please consider contributing when you’ve found an article to be beneficial.
News
-
Fedora Asahi 40 Remix Available for Macs with Apple Silicon
If you've been anticipating KDE's Plasma 6 for your Apple Silicon-powered Mac, then you're in luck.
-
Red Hat Adds New Deployment Option for Enterprise Linux Platforms
Red Hat has re-imagined enterprise Linux for an AI future with Image Mode.
-
OSJH and LPI Release 2024 Open Source Pros Job Survey Results
See what open source professionals look for in a new role.
-
Proton 9.0-1 Released to Improve Gaming with Steam
The latest release of Proton 9 adds several improvements and fixes an issue that has been problematic for Linux users.
-
So Long Neofetch and Thanks for the Info
Today is a day that every Linux user who enjoys bragging about their system(s) will mourn, as Neofetch has come to an end.
-
Ubuntu 24.04 Comes with a “Flaw"
If you're thinking you might want to upgrade from your current Ubuntu release to the latest, there's something you might want to consider before doing so.
-
Canonical Releases Ubuntu 24.04
After a brief pause because of the XZ vulnerability, Ubuntu 24.04 is now available for install.
-
Linux Servers Targeted by Akira Ransomware
A group of bad actors who have already extorted $42 million have their sights set on the Linux platform.
-
TUXEDO Computers Unveils Linux Laptop Featuring AMD Ryzen CPU
This latest release is the first laptop to include the new CPU from Ryzen and Linux preinstalled.
-
XZ Gets the All-Clear
The back door xz vulnerability has been officially reverted for Fedora 40 and versions 38 and 39 were never affected.
agree
Rolling release
lowest common demoninator or in fact least common multiple?