Slashdot Mirror

Sorry to say that, but production sites like Rpmfind.Net use ext3 in the last ~2 years without any troubles. About XFS, I don't care, but do a search here to know why Linus won't include it before 2.5.

Try this:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&w=2&r =1&s=promise+ultra66&q=b

Other people seem to be running it OK, and there's a patch or two that might be related...

If you're not familiar with Marcelo Tosatti and feel that you want to "read up" on him. Here's a good way. Follow the link below and you'll find over a 1000 posts made by him in different linux mailing lists, particularly the kernel list. Marcelo Tosatti in the MARC archives

Tell that to my SMP box, where 2.4.x still freezes with SMP support. No errors, either.

See http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=100 360434129916&w=2 for details.

Wayne Brown points out that It's highly unlikely that Alan withholding information from a handful of US
Linux users and developers will have any effect on US laws. I would go a step further and say that actions like this do us anti-DMCA'rs more harm than good - stupid shit like this doesn't motivate us any better, rather it brings us one step closer to just accepting the fact that we can't do anything about it. Shame on Alan for being such an idealist!

Really ?

> I cannot believe they are releases of stable branch, Sigh.

According to Alan Cox, in a message to the XFS list, he mentions that 2.4.10 is kindof 2.5 in disguise. It looks like Linus is making some fairly large changes that aren't as proven as those which he normally includes in production releases.

Does that bother me? Not really. I still have 2.4.0 running on my servers, and that only because it was reputed to do better on multiprocessor machines. Maybe the next time I do hardware upgrades I'll think about a newer kernel.

steve

It's ALSA's fault: read this message by Robert Love, the preemtible-kernel-patch's author. The guy who reported this problem later switched to OSS/Free and the latency problems were gone.

Basically, why is this not the default behavior?

Well, the traditional view on this is that reducing latency by whatever means tends to lower overall data throughput, which is just what you don't want for a server OS, which is still what accounts for most Linux installations.

However, it may be that the traditional view is wrong. It may well be that the increased usage efficiency that comes with kernel pre-emption may actually increase throughput - high-priority disk I/O for instance now never has to sit waiting for the CPU to complete a syscall. There were some interesting results posted linux-kernel regarding this, see here.

The linux scheduler ensures that no process is ever completely starved of CPU time, so no huge backlog of syscalls ever builds up.

The other reason that it's not the default behaviour is that it's an interesting and new approach to how to achieve a pre-emptible kernel. All other pre-emptible kernels have been designed as such from the ground up - Linux certainly hasn't. There are a couple of white papers, here and here from MontaVista (who kickstarted the pre-emptible kernel project) about the approach taken. They also detail a few other approaches to making Linux more responsive for real-time and interactive tasks.

I'd like to invite everyone to become a beta tester for the Mandrake Linux PPC version. Here's some tips on how to get started: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=mandrake-cooker-pp c&m=99441208917647&w=2

Here are some screenshots of the PPC Beta1 running on a PowerBook:
http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/demos/PPC/Install /pages/install32.html

This is a list of features:
http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/ppc.php3

Cheers,
Phil Lavigna

As for the video capturing, here are a few places to start:

Video for Linux resources
Video for Linux mailing list - archives

no, linus doesn't want to replace the boot information with clouds, penguins, or anything else. FUD, FUD, FUD.

what he said was: "'Informational' messages aren't informational, they're just annoying, and they hide the _real_ stuff."

The "real" stuff is still there. What should be cut (and right on, Linus!) are "version strings, author information, and "good status" messages".

bleh. go read it.

However sincere you may be, I don't think you should be spouting on subjects you are less than fully informed about. When X15 was first released the author claimed it was a slightly faster than TUX, which turned out to be true, even after Ingo Molnar worked together with Fabio Riccardi, X15's author, to resolve some small standards compliance issues. However exciting X15 may be as a piece of software engineering, it is not a replacement for TUX unless its restrictive licence is changed. Looking into my magic mirror, I see half a dozen busy teams of geeks working feverishly on GPL'd/Apache licenced high-performance user space http servers. It's clear the future of http is in user space, not the kernel.

As for "Cheetha", I don't know a thing about it, except that it is 2-3 orders of magnitude slower than you claimed.
--

However sincere you may be, I don't think you should be spouting on subjects you are less than fully informed about. When X15 was first released the author claimed it was a slightly faster than TUX, which turned out to be true, even after Ingo Molnar worked together with Fabio Riccardi, X15's author, to resolve some small standards compliance issues. However exciting X15 may be as a piece of software engineering, it is not a replacement for TUX unless its restrictive licence is changed. Looking into my magic mirror, I see half a dozen busy teams of geeks working feverishly on GPL'd/Apache licenced high-performance user space http servers. It's clear the future of http is in user space, not the kernel.

As for "Cheetha", I don't know a thing about it, except that it is 2-3 orders of magnitude slower than you claimed.
--

Well, here is the source from cvs. Dont know if it works.
There is some info on the modperl-dev mailing list, Hope this helps. There is probably a lot more.

In summary:

• The trademark must be acknowledged in the documentation (not every time you run the program);
• The commands can keep their name (ssh, sshd);
• THe IETF protocol would be renamed to SecSH.

  • See it here.

AFAIK, this is not a copyright issue. It's a *trademark* issue. Spare the juvenile flames.

It's fixed in the latest pre-patches, so you just might want to wait until 2.4.1 to try it out since it'll take forever for it to compile on a 386. By the time it is done compiling, you 2.4.1 might be out, anyway! ;-)

FWIW, I am using 2.4.0 on a P133/64MB and it runs great. This would be way overkill for just a firewall, we're using it as a development machine running Apache.

Your 486/100 32MB machine will be overkill for a firewall.

From personal experience I would put ColdFusion and PHP tied for the top slot. CF is cleaner and easier for building small apps but PHP has MUCH better support and is better for medium size apps. Not to mention the easiest to learn. ASP sucks. Really there is no such thing as ASP since its really a hodgepodge of VBScript, JScript and HTML. With Microsoft's .NET it gets even worse with 16+ languages available. PHP is simple, has decent string handling and excellent online support. PHP+Apache+MySQL is a killer combo. Want an easy install? Check out PHPTriad for Windows. Chances are than any question you could come up with has been asked and answered in one os the the support groups.

Patents are evil

Software patents are especially evil

Patents, and especially software patents, constitute nothing less than government-sponsored theft of property that properly belongs to humanity.

If we did not have any form of patent, humanity would be better off.

If we did not have any form of patent, the world economy would benefit. Yes, that means corporations too.

If we did not have any form of patent, *most voters would benefit* <-- pay close attention to this one

Patents are anti-capitalist: they interfere with the proper functioning of the market economy. Patents on business methods are already rearing their ugly head.

It's getting worse. If the current trend continues, you will soon see the life of patents being extended, you will see patents being granted in areas that were previously considered off-limits, and you will see countries outside the U.S. being pressured into supporting the patent system in various ways.

We can't change the world overnight, but we do already possess the power, if we excercise it, to send the laws that gave birth to software patents back into the cesspool they crawled out of.

In spite of the popular myth about the lone inventor who strikes it rich, the only real beneficiaries of patents are corporations. Yes, a few lone inventors strike it rich, but not enough to undo the damage done to humanity in general. Most lone inventors just get ripped off by people who prey on them and their dreams.

If all patents were to vanish today and never come back research in general would accelerate, not slow down. Linux is proof of that.

Lawyers built the patent system. Tim O'Rielly once asked a patent lawyer how he would feel if other lawyers could patent legal arguments and charge him money to use those arguments in court. Though he tried to twist out of answering that one, eventually he had to admit that he had no answer. This lawyer IIRC is the director of the U.S. Trade and Patent office.

Patents are evil

Software patents are especially evil

Patents, and especially software patents, constitute nothing less than government-sponsored theft of property that properly belongs to humanity.

If we did not have any form of patent, humanity would be better off.

If we did not have any form of patent, the world economy would benefit. Yes, that means corporations too.

If we did not have any form of patent, *most voters would benefit* <-- pay close attention to this one

Patents are anti-capitalist: they interfere with the proper functioning of the market economy. Patents on business methods are already rearing their ugly head.

It's getting worse. If the current trend continues, you will soon see the life of patents being extended, you will see patents being granted in areas that were previously considered off-limits, and you will see countries outside the U.S. being pressured into supporting the patent system in various ways.

We can't change the world overnight, but we do already possess the power, if we excercise it, to send the laws that gave birth to software patents back into the cesspool they crawled out of.

In spite of the popular myth about the lone inventor who strikes it rich, the only real beneficiaries of patents are corporations. Yes, a few lone inventors strike it rich, but not enough to undo the damage done to humanity in general. Most lone inventors just get ripped off by people who prey on them and their dreams.

If all patents were to vanish today and never come back research in general would accelerate, not slow down. Linux is proof of that.

Lawyers built the patent system. Tim O'Rielly once asked a patent lawyer how he would feel if other lawyers could patent legal arguments and charge him money to use those arguments in court. Though he tried to twist out of answering that one, eventually he had to admit that he had no answer. This lawyer IIRC is the director of the U.S. Trade and Patent office.

Just a thought. I only saw this garbaged up patch; I can see that you really do know how to submit a patch when the MTAs and MUAs cooperate. Good luck.

Question: Is there Linux support for the hardware checksumming?

Answer: 3c590, 3c900, 3c905, 3c575 - they all have hardware support for Tx and Rx checksums - UDP and TCP. Many other NICs do as well.

Linux uses the hardware checksum on receive, but not on transmit. The cost of doing the Tx checksum is small compared to the cost of the mem->mem copy, which is performed at the same time.

You can read this thread in the archives here.

Most mailing lists I'm interested in are listed at the Mailing list ARChives or at The Mail Archive (no relation!).

I'd be interested in learning of some other (non-Geocrawler) sites as well. Geocrawler is too slow and cluttered.

All signs of sharing and cooperation are welcome. However, it seems to me that soon the Linux and BSD communities are headed to a de facto total divorce, although this will be denied for a while.

The instrument of this in my opinion will be the inclusion of ReiserFS as part of an official stable Linux kernel. From what I have read from various mailing lists such as those at http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=reiserfs&r=1&w=2 and Debian, ReiserFS will only be licensed for free operating systems under the GPL. In my opinion this means that ReiserFS will never be part of the base distributions of the free source BSDs.

I believe that in five years ReiserFS will be the default file system for most Linux distributions. Of course ordinarily with Unix associated filesystems the particular one does not matter all that much for data interchangeability, but ReiserFS is but a small part of Hans Reiser's rather persuasive and exciting vision http://devlinux.com/projects/reiserfs/whitepaper.h tml. True right now there are many statements about how there will be upward compatible migration paths for different filesystems and even operating systems, but I see no way to avoid eventual nonportability of information between ReiserFS and other filesystems.

And that's when the total break will occur. ReiserFS is getting support right now from some of the heavyweights such as SuSE, which means that there will be a high degree of integration between ReiserFS and the distributions. Conversely if ReiserFS isn't part of the base free source BSD distributions, it will not enjoy those communities' professional quality integration efforts.

In my opinion the free source community would have been better off a while ago adopting a common stance for open implementable standards regardless of GPL, BSD, or MIT X licensing, but that window of opportunity of probably past.

Having used MySQL for over 3 years to manage web statistics and personal databases, I can't speak highly enough about it. Haven't used PostgreSQL probably because MySQL did the job early and still does, so why bother. Given that PostgreSQL has more features that make front-end programming easier, I'd say it's just a matter of where you feal comfortable spending your coding time. If it's on the back-end, MSSQL will do just as well, plus you don't get the issues with running an open source OS for the database (although, MySQL runs just fine on Win32).

Where MySQL truly excels is in the level of technical ability in the user group. It's an accumulation of some of the most qualified technical insights you'll probably ever find. Take a look at the List Archives to search for virtually anything database related.

My $.02
Linux rocks!!! www.dedserius.com

This story, about Borland's upcoming Delphi for Linux, has drawn a very clear line in the sand between introverted Linux zealots and the people who are going to move Linux forward.

This Debian proposal should draw an even clearer one.

In the PHP FAQ, there's a section on PHP vs. Coldfusion. Also, there's a link to an article by a CF and PHP developer, making the comparison.

I found it REALLY useful.

I do hope Linus accepts this last minute reiserfs addition. This is one component that would be of great benefit to Linux.

http://marc.theai msgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=95276159801406&w=2
List: linux-kernel
Subject: Re: Linux-2.3.51, and the pre-2.4 series..(can reiserfs get in?)
From: Hans Reiser
Date: 2000-03-10 20:59:05

We now have a working port of reiserfs for 2.3.49, and I am not sure whether you consider us pending. Can reiserfs get in? Putting us in as an experimental file system until we are accepted by the community as known stable is just fine.
Our 2.2 version seems to be accepted by the users on our reiserfs mailing list as stable.

We'll port it to the new 2.3.51 starting immediately, the 2.3.49 version will hit our webserver in a few hours.

Sorry we tweaked longer than we should have, and created inconvenience for you.

Hans

I've been hunting around mailing lists and howtos for the status of Ethernet USB in Linux kernels. I've found quite a bit about the USB->USB networking.

Here is a post that Free/NetBSD have drivers for ten devices. Close, you can compile free software, and it's not Windows. :)

See the "Question about MPEG playback on HW" thread on the video4linux archives - if you can find them.

Found. Interesting.