Slashdot Mirror

You are incorrect w.r.t. Linus quote, that's what Chris Wedgwood said. Linus is still considering Monotone, believing that the speed issues can be fixed.

Judging from the level of enthusiasm, the second top contender is probably Bazaar-NG, if it really delivers in time. SVN and derivatives aren't really so popular amongst kernel developers, for various reasons, so I wouldn't say it is that much likely that they/we will use that.

Note that we are now working on Git (you might like my branch now, which provides some humanly usable user interface ;-) ), Linus' interim storage system suitable for tracking of trees history. It is not a full-blown versioning control system, but it is lightning fast and probably can do enough stuff to be usable for the development at least until some full-blown VCS matures.

I've been using Ubuntu/x86_64 with the Kubuntu KDE distribution for the past four weeks. It's nice to have a decent installer and a system that works almost out of the box (past configuring the system for small personal preferences).
As much as I like this, there are other things that make it difficult for me to use it:

1. Wacom is not supported out of the box, and the Wacom driver module packages are incomplete (the build rules don't copy anything but wacom.ko). It'd be great to be able to install Ubuntu or Kubuntu and have the Wacom tablet work as advertised on the Linux-Wacom Driver Project page.

2. I got errors booting Grub with / and /boot on a raid1 device. On every bootup. Perhaps Ubuntu could support grub+raid1+root+boot in the future; see here for details. I was unsuccessful at getting LILO to boot, too. Maybe it's a hardware thing [1].

3. On Ubuntu/x86-64 win32 video codecs run only under a chroot'd 32-bit environment. Ubuntu could make this task easier/more seamless (for example, I want to see videos with Kaffeine or Xine, but AIUI they have to be run in a chroot environment.. that's not very seamless..)

4. It'd be great to have the installer automatically install the commercial NVidia drivers. They're currently an optional package.

5. Also great would be the inclusion of Jeff Garzik's SATA thermal sensor patches for libATA, available here.
With this patch, hddtemp works on SATA drives.

6. Ubuntu doesn't seem to have installation-time setup of the "sensors" package (i.e., run sensors-detect and install the modules as needed automatically).

7. Missing packages. Kubuntu was missing (last I checked a few days ago) the Python bindings for KDE. For that matter, there are packages that don't exist for x86_64 systems, like Psyco, Flash and the Adobe Reader.

I've since switched to Alioth's Debian/x86_64, but would happily switch back when Kubuntu-x86_64 matures, as Alioth does not seem to have 64-bit KDE 3.4.0 packages (could be wrong though).

references:

1. My motherboard is a MSI NEO K8T FIS2R with an Athlon64/3200+.

- Roey

"A decade ago, a self-taught computer genius from Finland [...] There's more on the Finish computer guy here."

(I think you get the point)

Late reply I know, but here we go.

First point: Service Pack 2.

Service Pack two was available on many magazine coverdisks soon after it came out, so there is no need to download 200mb at all. Updates since have been quite small, I can't remember how small but certainly only a few megabytes. Now I purchased my XP for real money. Shocking concept I know for the average visitor here, but the genuine OEM disk purchased with my machine came with service pack 2 already on it. So there was no need to download it at all.

Thank god Fedora comes with packages, because if I had to download it all it simply wouldn't be an option for me on dialup. I dread to think of the hassle involved in downloading all the different components required for a system. I would kill for setup.exe software installation ease on linux, installer package size be damned.

The is plenty of software available for Windows that will bring it up to the same level of functionality as Fedora. Some of it is even free and the same as you will find on Linux (Fedora, OpenOffice etc.). Guess what, it's even easier to install it.

Understand that I have no problem with Open Source Software, in fact I prefer it. I am merely pointing out the difficiencies in some of the attitudes towards the poor bod who actually ends up using it and in one particular product, Fedora itself.

3 Points to Windows.

3:0

Second Point: SATA problems

OK so I forgot to put in the .6, so shoot me. Some responses on here have just been shooting me down for that minor brain fade. This shows the attitude problem some Slashdotters have clearly. Rather than just correct me (as you have done), some piss taking allowed, ridicule the poster for a minor error in an attempt to make them look silly and not challenge them about the point they were trying to make. I am not a machine, sometimes I make still errors, get over it. Not that I expect better on Slashdot mind you :)

You wanted bugzilla entries, try here and here. Not a lot that would help the average user. You shouldn't need to be a programmer to install an operating system anyway. Infact not many answers at all, just silently fixed in 2.6.10. Please don't assume I haven't already posted it to Bugzilla next time.

Argument: Fedora won't even install, XP has no problems and didn't even need a driver disk. Pretty simple eh?

1 Point to Windows

1:0 - Ah can't be bothered with the silly scoring any more.

rhgb: It happens without fail. My main problem is with it freezing and not just giving up and allowing you to boot in text mode. Also why haven't they added a non rhgb startup option to the bootloader anyway if it is unreliable.

We all know Microsoft and a secure computer don't sit well together. But they are working on it at last. I've had no problems at all - yet - cross fingers sacrifice first born. Mind you I do keep the patches up to date, use the firewall and keep my virus checker up to date.

My installation media came with service pack two and my virus checker was installed before connnecting to the internet. Some common sense is required here however...

Mind you I'd rather clean a virus attack off a doze box than a linux box. God knows what would get changed, what back doors would be left around. If linux ever catches up with windows, I would be really supprised if it didn't suffer the same level of attacks, virus infections etc.

udev may be nice, but my first priority is a system that works. If it isn't broke then don't fix it ;). Actually thats not quite true, if you are going to break it in a way that will affect an awfull lot of users at least disp

They don't need to reinvent the wheel.

After all, it's the high end of that curve -- e.g. the anybody-to-anybody connection of the 'net -- that brings us things like wikipedia and Linux. IMO, when you start reaching scales "beyond mortal comprehension" (or at least everyday life) the growth isn't as much being able to connect to more individuals, but being able to have more specialized groupings and network those.

You're doing something on a non-professional level, and expect professional level results on the cheap? I don't think its going to happen.

Nah, that could never happen.

You can find it in his own subdirectory on kernel.org at:

http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/greg kh/v2.6.11/

It includes tiny fixes such as a Dell laptop keyboard fix and a raid6 compilation fix for ppc.

Well, as the LKML will show it's an odd problem that comes and goes for alot of users under generally different conditions (many aren't using KVM's and such at all). The full changelog http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/Change Log-2.6.11 shows a number of fixes made to the input system, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed. I'll try vanilla out tonight and see if that helps any...

http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/ChangeLog- 2.6.11

Hmm... typical Sun employee.

Sun would get my respect with they were using an standard license.

Until then... no thanks, I rather use the real free alternatives than to help Sun minimize development costs using the FOSS community.

Changelog 2.6.11 (Summary of changes from v2.6.10 to v2.6.11)
Or go to kernel.org and click on Changelog next to 2.6.11 :)

This elitist racist-ass cracker hasn't taken any submissions from the brothers!

Remember, because it costs almost nothing to make

Oops. Typo? Freudian slip?

Software has a very high cost to make. It requires highly skilled laborers, and lots of time to make. Making high-quality software is difficult, and by the nature of things it's difficult for a programmer to make software that's easy to use.

Notice I never argued against open licenses. Also, I never argued that software costs little to reproduce. It costs about $0.50 to make a CD-R, if you don't mind a vanilla, paper case.

I argued (and still argue) that software piracy reduces the actual saleability of soft wares. It essentially makes a vendor compete against himself, and therefore should legitimitely be called "theft", because doing so takes value away from the goods that highly qualified personnel spent lots of time to create.

If you want to gouge people, then you can hardly blame them for using it and not paying you.

Don't like the price? Don't buy it. Think it's wrong? Write your own open-licensed product and give it away. There's certainly plenty of people who are.

The ONLY time your arguments might have weight is in the case of a monopoly, and in these United States, we have protections for that, too.

Why do you feel the need to justify theft? Your arguments cast a pall from those of us who are dedicated to using and supporting truly open, free licenses on software!

Opennms

Mon

Big Brother

For system information polling I'd go with:

Cacti hands down this is the best polling system out there and it's simple to setup and run.

Screw windows Linux scheduler under 2.6 doesn't work like the one in 2.4, the 2.6 scheduler makes it's own WRONG mind up about what priorities things should have.

WRONG from the point of view of someone who's trying to emulate Windows on Linux down to timings, perhaps. However, I have observed much better desktop experience under Linux 2.6 than 2.4, so from my point of view, the scheduler makes up it's own RIGHT mind about priorities.

As for the priority rubbish your spouting,

I'm not spouting anything, I referred to a post in the Wine development mailing list that discussed this problem. Quote: "The reason you see pretty steady 10 ms resolution on Windows is that the winmm thread on Windows is flagged as a priority 15 thread, so it does not get interrupted or time sliced away; it fires precisely when it wants to. It's much harder to achieve the same thing on Linux, sadly."

This certainly seems like real-time scheduling to me.

try editing MMTIMER to boost the priority and then running wine as root. (I'll send you a patch if you want?)

I'm not going to run Wine as root. If I did, however, I would try to use pthread_setschedparam to set the thread in question into real-time scheduling (but of course this runs the risk of deadlocking the system). Of course it might be a good idea to drop the root privileges afterwards.

In any case, Wine has bigger problems than sound support to worry about - fullscreen games don't work properly, for example Fallout 2 has the Gnome panel visible over it, and a crashing game leaves the screen in wrong resolution and sometimes "detachs" the mouse somehow, requiring X to be restarted to fix. Admittedly, the two last problems should be handled by the X server...

Regardless of windows the 2.6 kernel 'changes' things and the user cannot prevent it from doing so.

The user can most certainly avoid the changes in 2.6 - just use 2.4, it is still being maintained, after all. So is 2.2, for that matter - and http://www.kernel.org/ seems to contain a year-old release of 2.0 too.

Or did you mean that you want a kernel that's exactly identical to 2.4, except for the version number ? I'm sure that kind of patch would be easy to make ;).

And programs that rely on some particular timing charasteristics of the scheduler are buggy. They will randomly fail on any system, especially when it comes under load.

Yes, Linux as a term is used too loosely, and broadly.

Some badly needed clarity as to what Linux is:

Linux is the name of a kernel developed by Linus Torvalds and friends. Contrary to popular belief, there is one, and only one important Linux distribution, it is www.kernel.org.

Anyone with a copy of Linux obtained from there is free to share and modify it. Thus by definition it is free software.

The copyright holders of Linux share it with the world with via a copyleft free software license called the GNU General Public License. The principal of copyleft is, "if you redistribute this work to others, please pass on the same freedoms to them that were given to you." Thus, copyleft is the "golden rule" applied to software, with some legal machinery to make it work.

Linux is thus always free software. There are no non-free versions of Linux.

You're not talking about free as in "no cost" are you? Anyone with a copy of free software can redistribute it for any price they choose. This has helped our community grow immensely. It is an important freedom.

I think you and others are confusing GNU/Linux distributions, with Linux itself. I would sugest that you spend some time reading the philosophy of the GNU project.

Sadly, several companies pollute the free software ecosystem with non-free garbage. Quite a few of these programs are "free download", but come with no real freedom.

Well, if your going to be like that
the kernel has had hundreds of patches * go in and a lot of them could potentially lead to an exploit.

DOS: Fix kernel data leak to user space in private handler handling

Execute arbitrary code in an application that can't cope with literal names: This is a fix for the "Addi%d" device name reported literally due to the switch from init_fddidev() to alloc_fddidev().

Another DOS: USB: corrected digi_acceleport 2.6.9-rc1 fix for hang on disconnect

It's even had the +5 insightful
[PKT_SCHED]: Trivial spelling fix in net/sched/Kconfig drivers patch.

*This link is to a 1.5mb changelog please don't hog kernel.orgs bandwidth.

Which beggs the question: How many of those kind of bugs arn't fixed in Windows?

Here you go, I found the source for you :)

• release a Windows-like, MS-managed window manager for Linux,
• release Office for Linux,
• create a Linux compatibility layer for Windows, and/or
• create a Microsoft-managed Linux distribution?

http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/kernel/cpufr eq/cpufreq.html

CPUfreq works very well both on my Dell Inspiron 8600 (Pentium M, 1.8GHz) and my desktop machine (Pentium 4, 3.0EGHz).

Using CPUfreq is a good way of lowering CPU temperature when all of the CPU's power is not required (like when using the computer just to listen to music, etc).

Check out the very end of the 2.6.11-rc3 Changelog.

<torvalds@ppc970.osdl.org>
Linux 2.6.11-rc3

PPC?

I don't know that that means jack, but it's an interesting name.

devoted to aggregating other websites... Am I the only one who thinks that we have too many websites these days? What's wrong with kernel.org?

If they want me to believe their product contains no malware, spyware or adware, there is exactly one way they can convince me. And that's the same way that RMS, Linus and ESR convinced me that their software is clean.

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.

Yes, but as the grandparent post states.

It's too confusing for Joe 6-Pack to be able to decide on a linux distrobution to use. Lets Look at Joe's thoughts.

"I've had to remove even more Viruses and spywares off my computer. I thought that Anti-Norton-Virus was supposed to protect me." (Note, as someone who helps Joe 6pack too often, yes, they call it the anti-norton-virus, instead of NAV)

"What's this Linux thing I read about?" (Followed by a search from one of his pay-per-click toolbars. See's ads to increase his *nix by 3 inches)

"Wow, there's a fedora linux, mandrake linux, debian linux, slackware linux. I don't like the sound of that last one, I think it's made by slackers"

Now deciding to find out what linux is and why there's so many, Joe types "what is linux" into his spyware toolbar and finds...

Linux is a kernel that developers can create the rest of a computer operating system on top of.

Joe now wonders why there's an army officer in his computer, or worse yet, a piece of popcorn. So in confusion he searchis for pr0n from his pr0n only toolbar and forgets about it.

The moral of the story, All these branches of linux are confusing to Joe, and without Joe's support linux can't wipe out M$. So if we can't decide on one, lets reduce it to the big players, then keep a few around for elitist (Such as gentoo) and call it a day.

Where indeed.

I mean, it's not like we (I work for Red Hat) make the source freely available on our own FTP server, or put it in the same tree that gets rsync'd to every RH mirror on the planet.

Oh, wait. We do.

I am sorry, it might be off-topic but I see this guys sig. second time and wanted to tell him that if he just looked into a kernel change log and got the e-mail address of Linus instead of asking on slashdot. If it ment to be joke, just ignore my comment. link to kernel.org http://www.kernel.org/

I'm saying that the Linux community doesn't.

From reading that article, it looks like the people had a security patch they wanted to submit, and couldn't figure out who to submit it to. They got all kinds of conflicting answers, and there were no obvious "Submit Security Patches Here" email address listed anywhere.

Those things should've been in place already.

From all the backpatting about security that happens around here, you would've thought they were in place.

There still isn't a link on kernel.org.

We're just waiting on SCSI to finalize its "ATA passthru" drafts before the patch can go to mainline.

like this

...does it run Lin--ah, just about everything does.

But, does it run Racer --ugh, runs that too...

BUT, does it use x86-64? YES, something it can't do! But then you all knew that.

There are large sections of code that havent been touched since 1.x releases. Linux frankly runs for shit on anything other than x86, despite all the claims of all the different systems it runs on. Too much PC specific cruft.

Actually i'm not totally convinced. I didn't see LKML full of complaints neither developers saying "we should do something about it now". PC specific "cruft" can be disabled or is disabled by default on non-x86. It would be interesting to do a diffstat from 1.x up until today's kernel, with statistics. If i cannot find any source that has done it before i might do it even. THEN we can talk about the age of code. The last change to 1.3 has been made on 20-Mar-2003 15:02 according to kernel.org. I wouldn't call that 10 years old neither.

Alan Cox has a patch up for the 2.6.10 kernel, available here.

The file is patch-2.6.10-ac8.bz2 (or later)

This is also still considered "testing" until merged.

Second, it'll probably be patched rather quickly.

There is a preliminary patch in testing for the 2.4 series.

Look here.

The file is patch-2.4.29-rc1.bz2

Note that it's in TESTING, because it probably needs testing yet. But if you're desperate to patch it up quickly at your own risk, then there you go.

I can't find an analogous note in the 2.6 changelogs.

2.4.29rc1 ( http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/testin g/patch-2.4.29-rc1.bz2) and 2.6.10-ac6 ( http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/alan /linux-2.6/2.6.10/patch-2.6.10-ac6.bz2) fixed this exploit.

2.4.29rc1 ( http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/testin g/patch-2.4.29-rc1.bz2) and 2.6.10-ac6 ( http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/alan /linux-2.6/2.6.10/patch-2.6.10-ac6.bz2) fixed this exploit.

Oh, that is so yesterday! Keep up, people!

;)

have had their flights cancelled by Comair this weekend thanks to a computer system shutdown.

Comair Cancels All 1,100 Flights
Saturday, December 25, 2004

hum...

2.6.10 2004-12-24 22:38 UTC

probably they were restarting the boxes from the new kernel? :\

If you look at the size of the 2.6 changelogs: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/
They get larger every release. What gives?

Of course it is signed.

PGP sig for the patch

Instructions

Of course it is signed.

PGP sig for the patch

Instructions

Don't forget about the changelog. It weighs in at a meaty 1.5 megs this time.

Around 20 years ago a programmer at MIT quit his job to develop a complete and free Unix-style operating system--the GNU system. That programmer was Richard Stallman, also known as rms, the founder of the Free Software Foundation.

Since 1984 he has fought for software freedom and created the concept of free software. Software is considered free if users have the following four freedoms:

• The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
• The freedom to study how the program works and adapt it to your needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition.
• The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
• The freedom to improve the program and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition.

Copyleft licenses protect these four freedoms. The most prominent license is the GNU General Public License, which allows the author to retain a copyright and permits redistribution and modification under terms designed to ensure that all modified versions of the software remain under copyleft terms.

In this period of threats to freedom, Federico Biancuzzi interviewed this freedom paladin.

FB: GNU/Linux (the complete OS!) is probably the most known free software project. What do you think about the fact that Linux (the kernel!) uses a proprietary program to manage its source code?

RMS: It is unfortunate when anyone uses proprietary software. Using it publicly for the development of a prominent free software package is particularly unfortunate, because it sets a bad example for the community.

FB: Isn't there any free alternative under development?

RMS: There are already free programs that do the same basic job. Linus Torvalds feels they are not convenient enough, and he values convenience more than he values standing firm for freedom. I think that is leading the community in the wrong direction.

As part of the GNU Project, Tom Lord is developing a new free source control system called Arch, which we hope will outdo the proprietary ones.

But just because we are competing with proprietary software on issues of technical merit doesn't mean we think people should choose the program for source control based on technical qualities alone. That would mean assigning zero value to freedom itself. If you value freedom, you will resist the temptation to use a program that takes away your freedom, whatever technical advantages it may have.

FB: What do you think about proprietary software? Does it have low quality? Is it unsecure? Does it restrict freedom too much? Is it unethical?

RMS: Proprietary software is unethical, because it denies the user the basic freedom to control her own computer and to cooperate. It may also be of low quality or insecure, but that's a secondary issue. I will reject it even if it is the best quality in the world, simply because I value my freedom too much to give it up for that.

FB: Would you accept a federal law in the United States to enforce the distribution of source code with every type of software?

RMS: I am not calling for such a law as of now, but I think that would be a valid consumer protection measure--like requiring food products to publish the list of ingredients.

Of course, some software companies would object to this, j

In large projects there are often people who have production systems that would incur large costs if they were forced to do a major rev upgrade.

Of course before OSS this was never an issue as people didn't have a choice but as people now do, thanks largely in part to the ability of OSS project heads to put a few "free" developers on a older rev for maintenance, large OSS projects often maintain older revs for the sake of the users..

You really need look no further than the Linux Kernel to see another example of this in action.

How could they analyse the 2.6 kernel 4 years ago when 2.6 is less then a year old?
ReadingTFA: "The Linux source-code analysis project started in 2000"...

This is an ongoing study, to find the bugs checkout Bugzilla.kernel.org it's not like they hide them or anything

Ummm...go to their website and download it for free. Yes, you can. It isn't openly publicized, but you can get the source packages (without support, which means no RedHat Network) of the advanced server distribution from their download servers. Here is a mirror. Now, you can quibble about them only distributing source packages, but a) it is already more than is required by the GPL (they don't have to host the packages) and b) there is already a free cutting-edge distribution that fills in the place of the old retail version (Fedora). The only reason to go after AS is if you need the support package, otherwise the only differences are in package versions (AS software is mostly out of date, which is what you want if you are running a server).

Personally, I think RHES it's always way out of date, especially since it's still running a 2.4 kernel.

The point to RHES is to run enterprise applications. These are apps that are developed or have evolved over years, and are meant to run with stability for years to come. There is no need to run on bleeding-edge releases (or even stitches-still-in releases).

2.6 has not been out for a year yet. Heck kernel.org just started running its website on 2.6 in May! And you want me to move my critical enterprise apps over to it? Millions of $$$ are dependent on these systems.

Thanks, I'll take a widely used and stable 2.4 (currently .21) on my system. Call me when your kernel has been field tested for a year.

Personally, I think RHES it's always way out of date, especially since it's still running a 2.4 kernel.

The point to RHES is to run enterprise applications. These are apps that are developed or have evolved over years, and are meant to run with stability for years to come. There is no need to run on bleeding-edge releases (or even stitches-still-in releases).

2.6 has not been out for a year yet. Heck kernel.org just started running its website on 2.6 in May! And you want me to move my critical enterprise apps over to it? Millions of $$$ are dependent on these systems.

Thanks, I'll take a widely used and stable 2.4 (currently .21) on my system. Call me when your kernel has been field tested for a year.

I have a crappy old NEC Versa VXi, and the thing can't run anything Microsoft-flavored that is newer than Windows 98. I've had Gentoo on it for some time, and it works great.