Is it really recommended to install Tuxinvader kernel on Zorin 17 in 2026?
We often link the tutorial "[HOW TO] Easily install a later kernel", but the last update for the Tuxinvader kernel was 2024. Is it still supported at all?
For ubuntu noble, Zorin 18 is based on, there is no ppa of tuxinvader offered.
I wouldn't know but it states 6.12 is LTS.
So the fact it is LTS and built in 2024 does that equate to an EOL of 2029?
Personally (I can't speak in respect of Zorin as I don't use it any more) I am using Liquorix kernel, recently updated to 7.1.8.
Looks for me that it isn't maintained anymore.
Well i looked the liquorix kernel does work with jammy....will depend of what hardware he has
I have edited the [How To] guide to remove the TuxInvader kernel portion due to it being abandoned.
The reason it stayed for so long and was there at all was due to Microsoft Behavior in GnuLinux. Ubuntu set a much higher GCC dependency than necessary, restricting kernel installs only to newer computers. For users running older (and By older, I mean older than not shiny new) computers, this was a problem.
The TuxInvader repository corrected that behavior, listing actual necessary dependencies.
Thank you, Aravisian. I see, you have removed Tuxinvader from the guide. Does this mean, it is no longer safe to use Tuxinvader because this ppa isn't maintained any more and you don't get updates for the kernel?
When installing a mainline kernel using the mainline installer tool, should you regularly check to make sure you have a kernel that’s still supported, or are some of these kernels LTS kernels that receive updates for years, such as 6.12? Since Ubuntu explicitly distances itself from mainline kernels and advises against using them except in certain cases, I’m not sure whether, for example, if you install the mainline 6.12 kernel, you’ll get the 6.12 LTS kernel from Ubuntu or the general 6.12 kernel from Linus Torvalds.
I noticed that the LTS kernels of the "normal" Linux kernels are not always the same as the LTS kernels of ubuntu. E.g. the ubuntu kernel 6.8 is a LTS kernel, the normal kernel 6.8 not.
Ever see an Expiration Date on a food container?
It does not mean that if the expiration date is 11/Nov/2025 that on 10/Nov/2025 it is good and on 12/Nov/2025 that the food is now rotten and unsafe.
It does not mean a kernel is unsafe.
If it did, then following logic, all kernels are unsafe.
There are quite a few people still using Zorin OS 16 or 17, on older hardware that need older kernel support. I could have left the TuxInvader option in that guide, just as easily as remove it.
I did not opt to remove it because it is unsafe. I did not remove it because it is no longer applicable.
I removed it to spare myself having to make a lengthy explanation as to why it was there - Most anyone actually on Zorin 16 or 17 already has most likely locked their kernel in and... if a person needs, they can open a thread on the the topic and get the advice that way.
Yes, TuxInvader is no longer actively maintaining kernel versions to bypass restrictive dependencies and yes, they are no longer getting updates.
It did not rot them.
Because that is Ubuntu's Way to handle the Kernels. That is the Reason why LTS here is only related to Ubuntu and not in common like You have with the - if You want so - ''official'' LTS supported Kernels that You can see listed on kernel.org
Well, there are missing some Security Updates. Theretically, You could use them. But when You take the Security Vulnerabilities from the near Past (Dirty Frag and others) these are not fixed with this.
When that isn't an Issue for You, You are free to use it. I personally, I'm not a Friend of that. But the Decision is on the individual User.
Hmm, different opinions here. Personally, I don't want to use a kernel that no longer receives updates (we are talking about years, not days in case of Tuxinvader) as long as there's a better alternative.
Canonical did something strange with Ubuntu.
Their kernels, they set an unnecessary and restrictive dependency on GCC version. This was reported, but ignored.
Due to this, many users, prior to the release of Ubtuntu 24.04, could not install a later needed kernel (due to hardware) on Zorin OS 16 or 17.
TuxInvader provided a fix, with correct dependencies, during that time period.
For users still using those earlier editions - this remains valid.
That is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of applicability.
But Security Updates are still missing.
They always are...
If you are on the 7.0-etc kernel right now, you are missing each and every one of the security updates it will get but has not yet gotten- and all the updates it won't get after it reaches end of life.
Sure, when the Kernel is no longer supported by Ubuntu, You don't get Security Updates. But until then, You get them. Yes, sometimes with a Delay but they come.
Yes, you get security updates - If They Exist.
Consider the sequence of events:
An unknown exploit exists. There is no security update - the exploit is unknown.
In time, it is discovered; then patched, this patch is included in a security update - and before that... that entire time, you were running that kernel, using your system, Without It because it was Unknown.
That is the reality: You are Always Running a Kernel that lacks security updates, even when it is actively getting security updates.
But this Principle is for every Kernel, doesn't matter if LTS or current one. And yes, You can only get Updates that exist - but this is the Point: When they exist, You should get them.
And when You now have the TuxInvader Kernel where Security Updates are missing for known Vulnerabilities this is a Problem in my Opinion.
The truth is... known or unknown are equal problems.
But human nature is to disregard the unknown and accept the known as the only valid option.
In this regard, it is a disservice to really understanding security.
Yes, if there is a patch, you want it. But in reality; this in itself does not suddenly mean that the TuxInvader supplied kernel is inherently unsafe.
Because if it does mean that - then following the logic despite human nature: That Means All Kernels Are Equally Unsafe.
Knowing or not knowing the vector - does not change that reality.
No, no. That isn't equal. When You know there is a Security Issue, You can work on it and provide a Fix which leads to an Update to fix the Security Issue.
When You have these Fixes but the Kernel doesn't get them, there are known open Doors that can be used. Maybe not all on the same Level depending on the specific Vulnerability, but it is there.
When You not know about a Security Issue, You can of Course don't offer a Fix. there is no Chance. You must know the Issue before You can fix it.
Well, when the TuxInvader Kernel misses Security Fixes that other Kernels received, the Kernel is unsafe.
When I don't get the newest Functions Updates, I don't Care. At the End, that depends if You need the new/newest Functions or not. But: Security Updates are for me a Must Have. To have that, is an essential Thing.
Then you understand, that all kernels are unsafe, right?
Because the kernel you are on and using right now - is lacking Security Fixes.
By your statement: If it is missing a security address and these are critical and you must have them... Every kernel in existence now falls under this problem.
They are equal and cannot be unequal by the very definition you are claiming. The only way to make them not equal, is if we were to agree that that not all patches are equal; that it is not a must have for only known and that Unknown somehow magically do not matter.
It is about known Security Issues and available Fixes - and the TuxInvader Kernel misses these.
For unknown Security Issues, You can of Course not have a Fix. Because it is unknown. That is the Reason for checking Stuff for Vulnerabilities and when something is found - and so a known Security Issue -, a Fix must come and land as an Update on the Users Machine.