Re: [PLUG] 2.2.16

[Bill Jonas <bj@netaxs.com>]

On 11 Jun 2000, Kevin Falcone wrote:

>with no noticeable problems.  Where did you see these reports?  I
>haven't seen anything on lkl, although I'm about a day behind in
>reading it.

A couple people on the Silicon Valley LUG (http://www.svlug.org/) list
have said that they noticed stability issues.  In fact, somebody said
that they were treated to a nice red and black screen after a crash,
which they said was a interesting change from the blue variety.  :)

I went back and looked at the messages there.  It turns out that the
original problem report was seen on the linux-router mailing list.  
Apparently some early (meaning, "before there was an official
linux-router release of it") 2.2.16 adopters incorporating the upgrade
into linux-router where having problems with some spontaneous reboots
approximately every hour.

Here are edited versions of the first and most recent messages in that
thread.

-----Begin-----
From: Ray Olszewski <ray@comarre.com>
To: svlug@svlug.org
Subject: Re: [svlug] Security exposure in kernels 2.2.x

I'm just starting to see 2.2.16 comments elsewhere, and the first one out of
the box (on the linux-router list) is a warning that it locks up systems
after an hour or so. It's too soon to tell, I suppose, if this report is a
fluke or an early warning of a real problem. In any case, it looks like, at
least for the next little while, 2.2.x users may be caught between a rock
and a hard place.

From: Ray Olszewski <ray@comarre.com>
To: svlug@svlug.org
Subject: Re: [svlug] Security exposure in kernels 2.2.x

At 10:12 AM 6/11/00 -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
>For whatever it's worth, I'm still not seeing problems with 2.2.16 on my
>server, at the 2.5 day mark.

It's probably worth quite a bit, Rick. When I first posted about this
problem Friday morning, the 2.2.16 release was only a few hours' old ... and
I was concerned that the trouble reports were an early sign of what would
prove to be a widespread problem. The scarcity of further trouble reports
(the one on this list is the only other I've seen) makes me think that one
of the following situations is occurring:

        1. Not many people are bothering to move to 2.2.16 
                (not likely, I'd guess).

        2. Almost all moves to 2.2.16 are successful (much more
                likely, I'd guess).
-----End-----

I guess I should've re-read a little more carefully and checked for the
latest postings before I posted here.  Sorry for any concern I might've
caused other PLUG members.

It was also mentioned that the 2.2.16 fixes were, in Debian, backported
to 2.2.15... so you should be good by either upgrading to 2.2.15 (or
2.2.16, of course) on your Debian box, or grabbing the latest Debian
kernel sources and rebuilding.

Bill
-- 
>Ever heard of .cshrc?             | "Linux means never having to delete
That's a city in Bosnia. Right?    |  your love mail." -- Don Marti
(Discussion in comp.os.linux.misc  |  http://www.netaxs.com/~bj/
on the intuitiveness of commands.) |  http://www.harrybrowne.org/


______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group       -       http://plug.nothinbut.net
Announcements - http://lists.nothinbut.net/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion   -   http://lists.nothinbut.net/mail/listinfo/plug