Core v4.6rc1

[AbNoRMiS]

perhaps there is no contradiction?
if script will be named tce-ab to satisfy naming convention
but also add link tce to tce-ab and include it in core
to satisfy those who often uses cli ab and accustomed to short name

[Rich]

Hi AbNoRMiS
Adding a third name will not help matters. There are already posts that reference the  ab  command and now there
will also be posts that reference the  tce-ab  command. Hopefully, newcomers to TC read these posts looking for
guidance, and in the interest of minimizing confusion, consistency of commands is a good thing.

[AbNoRMiS]

honestly i'm not sure that beginner when reading outdated guidance will guess that must use tce-ab instead of ab
for newcomers to avoid any confusion it would be nice to fix tinycore guidances according to recent changes

[Rich]

Regardless, I feel this point has been pretty well covered. If anyone feels a need to discuss this any further, I would
like to suggest they start a separate thread.

[nim108]

Bah, was hoping for another kernel update here as 3.0.21 does not support certain processors, which is a pretty big issue (i.e. the Atom E680 in an embedded board I am using is not supposed by 3.0.21; it kernel panics on startup). Is it safe to say that the next kernel update will only happen with a major release? It is not a major issue as I have recompiled the latest 3.0.xx kernel for my needs but to make this distro more "universal" and bug-free (let's face it, 3.0.21 is quite in the early stages of a very new 3.0 kernel), it may be worth exploring the option to upgrade sooner rather than later.

Anyway, sorry to go off track. Back on topic with 4.6, it did not break anything for me when I swapped out the core.gz, so it seems to work fine here. I will report back with any issues. Thanks as always for the updates! TC is great!

[curaga]

Yes, not counting fairly serious bugs, we stick to one kernel per major release.

Do you have a link to the exact change that fixes your issue?

(let's face it, 3.0.21 is quite in the early stages of a very new 3.0 kernel)

How do you come to that? The stable updates usually only go to 7-8, the longterm/enterprise lines like 3.0 are exceptions.

[nim108]

Yes, not counting fairly serious bugs, we stick to one kernel per major release.

Do you have a link to the exact change that fixes your issue?

(let's face it, 3.0.21 is quite in the early stages of a very new 3.0 kernel)

How do you come to that? The stable updates usually only go to 7-8, the longterm/enterprise lines like 3.0 are exceptions.

Yes, seems support for the e6xx Atom series was added in kernel 3.0.32: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/ChangeLog-3.0.32

pch_gbe: support ML7831 IOH
commit 7756332f5b64c9c1535712b9679792e8bd4f0019 upstream.
Support new device OKI SEMICONDUCTOR ML7831 IOH(Input/Output Hub)
ML7831 is for general purpose use.
ML7831 is companion chip for Intel Atom E6xx series.
ML7831 is completely compatible for Intel EG20T PCH.

This is just an example, I've seen newer kernels in the 3.0.xx series add support for more architectures as well. Just wanted to make you guys aware of it. And about 3.0.21, I just assumed that since 3.0 was a total revamp of the Linux kernel that 3.0.21 may still be a bit buggy. I keep track of the changelogs at kernel.org with every kernel update and compared to the 2.6.xx kernels of the past, there are seemingly many more fixes with every release of a 3.0.xx kernel. I'm sure 3.0.21 will hold up just fine, it works great on every other unit I have tested it on

Again, sorry for going off topic here ...

[tinypoodle]

I just assumed that since 3.0 was a total revamp of the Linux kernel that 3.0.21 may still be a bit buggy.

Your assumption is based on an absolute misperception
www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2388926,00.asp

[SvOlli]

busybox now features an (output incompatible, but very small) implementation of lsof, which might be also worth adding.

[roberts]

Look busybox lsof applet in rc2.

[tinypoodle]

Look busybox lsof applet in rc2.

Nice to have