Slashdot Mirror


Torvalds Tells All

Eugenia writes: "Linus Torvalds gives an interesting interview to OSNews.com, talking about everything people are wondering about his personal opinions on several matters: on the GNU/Linux naming, the GUIs currently offered for Linux, the kernel 2.6, his plans for hot-plugged devices & drivers, Microsoft, FreeBSD and the future in general."

19 of 525 comments (clear)

  1. Ouch! by RollingThunder · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I don't mind what rms calls the system. I don't think his arguments for the naming are very valid, but hey, at the same time I really couldn't care less.


    (emphasis added)

    Now that has GOT to hurt. The guy that tons of geeks look up to (rightly or wrongly), has just said that he doesn't really give a rats ass about what one of the Big Names keeps going on about.... Definately not what anyone in a philosophical debate wants to hear - people loving your idea is great, people loathing your idea is still something you can work with, but disregard? Ouch.
    1. Re:Ouch! by tb3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Personally, I think he's trying to avoid a massive flame war. Look at this quote from an article referenced in Slashdot a few days ago:

      "Free Software Foundation founder and major developer of the operating system known as GNU/Linux, Richard Stallman"

      Major developer? Since when? It sounds like Stallman is going out of his way to co-opt Linux (he emailed Taco asking him to link to the story) and Linus doesn't want to play. Good for him.

      --

      www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance

    2. Re:Ouch! by 4of12 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He's only focused on the code.

      Almost.

      Linus grants RMS and the FSF kudoes for developing gcc and accepts that the rest of the GNU system is useful in most contexts, but where I find his appreciation lacking is not necessarily in kowtowing to RMS' demand that the system be called "GNU/Linux", but public recognition of just how valuable and critical the entire concept of the GPL ("Share and share alike") has been to Linux kernel development.

      Perhaps I'm being unfair, that Linus has mentioned the importance of the GPL to the Linux kernel in public forums and I have simply missed it. But, if I've missed it, then you can bet a lot of other people have missed it as well and a great number of people are ignorant of just how important the GPL has been to this development process.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
  2. Linus sounds awfully tired by Delrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It seems to me that the more interviews I see from Linus, the more tired he sounds, or is exasperated a better word, anyone else noticing this? I think everyone in the UNIX community would like to see real answers to the questions in regards to .NET, and "competing" softwares. He even dodged the "Where do you see Linux in 5 to 10 years" question. Maybe he took some advise from Steve Jobs and decided not to be a preacher. :)

    1. Re:Linus sounds awfully tired by DickBreath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think everyone in the UNIX community would like to see real answers to the questions in regards to .NET, and "competing" softwares.

      Maybe those were the real answers.


      He even dodged the "Where do you see Linux in 5 to 10 years" question. Maybe he took some advise from Steve Jobs and decided not to be a preacher.

      Maybe he didn't dodge. Maybe he doesn't have a crystal ball and doesn't care to speculate. Maybe he really just likes hacking on the kernel.

      Everyone wants an oracle to tell us the future. Maybe he doesn't want to play that role.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    2. Re:Linus sounds awfully tired by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 5, Insightful
      He probably is tired: tired of answering the same questions over and over to different people. Can you imagine now often he must get asked these kinds of questions (especially the "where is Linux going" kinds of questions)? Every geek he meets must ask him several questions like this, not to mention the news media. He's probably developed some pat answers and dishes them out to eveyone who asks. That doesn't mean that he is tired of Linux.

      About .NET: That's really not his domain. .NET isn't a kernel service, and he's apparently not interested in it. He seems to be pretty satisfied with where the kernel is, and is focusing on cleaning up and adding in the last features that are really wanted by lots of people (like more scalability). He is interested more in the desktop/ease of use side of things now, because he feels that's where the real innovation and cool stuff is happening these days. And he's right :-) At least that's my take on it.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
  3. Re:FreeBSD by betis70 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah this one caught my eye too ... he slagged a whole bunch of OSes after saying he didn't follow them. Its pretty tough to know if something is techinically interesting if you don't follow any of the developments on it. If you don't know anything about the OS, just say that.

    --
    I forget...are we at war with Eurasia or East Asia?
  4. There is no spoon... by sheldon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Back in '92 when I first started working with Linux it was kind of cool. You could do things on your home computer that before were not very possible, or very expensive.

    It was just kind of cool, and fun.

    Then sometime in '97, shortly after the OS/2 regime was destroyed, Linux took on this holy jihad. Now it was a battle, it wasn't just good enough to create something kind of fun and geeky, the goal was to destroy all the infidels from Microsoft.

    It was at that point that Linux became no fun to use, and it was no longer fun to be around the Linux geeks.

    Linus has the right attitude. There is no enemy.

  5. Re:He SHOULD care about the competition... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    [yawn] I'm so sick of people quoting "The Art of War" and "On War" and "The Book of Five Rings" and other military classics in reference to software development. First of all, as several other posters have pointed out, L.T. sees himself primarily as a programmer, not a businessman -- he doesn't define other OS'es as "the enemy" and therefore doesn't worry about ancient military wisdom. Second, and perhaps more important, even more business-oriented programmers are fools if they think military advice translates to any business, especially software. No matter what the Japanese say, business _isn't_ war.

    Whatever happend to that fabled Japanese "business is war" economy, anyway? Oh, that's right -- all those warrior businessmen had a couple of decades of success with their slash'n'burn tactics, then kept going with it and drove one of the world's largest economies straight into the toilet.

    There's a lesson here, one which Microsoft and Oracle and Sun should learn really fast: war is about killing people and breaking things, and business (ideally) is about empowering people and building a stable, lasting structure to create good products. These are not only different goals, they're opposite and mutually incompatible goals, and techniques that work for one simply _do not work_ for the other.

    I've seen this from both sides, by the way -- I was in the Air Force when A.F. leadership went through a "TQM" craze. It didn't work worth a damn then, and "Sun Tzu's Guide To Crushing The Competition In The Global Marketplace" doesn't work now.

    --
    The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
  6. Re:Linux on the desktop by krmt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I agree, this is a major step and I'm glad to see that he's looking to it. Not only is he looking to have things be automatic, but he wants to get away from the whole "device manager" idea, which is what pervades windows. While he does say he doesn't care about the competition, he is trying to make Linux the best Linux it can be, and that will involve beating the competitors in some areas like this (hopefully!)

    Personally, this is my biggest complaint about the kernel as is. It's gotten much much better over time, but once it's really handled for the user it'll be one more relatively large hurdle that a user won't have to overcome. While Mandrake et al. have done a great job on autoconfiguration during install, things like adding a new CD-burner are often done later. It all obviously fits in to his notion (that I agree with) that the innovation will happen in the userspace, among projects like KDE. Autodetection and loading will be another kernel contribution to userspace enchancements.

    I'm just glad to see that, while most people gripe about what Linux can't do right now, the people who are actually doing the work are thinking about what it's going to be doing soon. This may frustrate people who just want a perfect system to appear magically before their eyes (as though Windows just showed up in its current form on the day they bought their computer) it'll wind up satisfying a lot of people in the long run. Makes it much more exciting to watch too.

    --

    "I may not have morals, but I have standards."

  7. Re:Microsoft vs. Linux Marketshare by Nugget · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not great unless you're willing to assume that every great idea and innovative feature that will ever be invented in the future will only come from your own developers.

    While I think that ryanf's comments and quotes from Sun Tsu elsewhere in this thread completely miss the point, Linus' head-in-the-sand attitude to the many great and exciting developments that are taking place in other operating systems is a shortcoming not a feature.

    There are people in this world who are at least as clever as Linus and they will continue to come up with new and useful ideas and refinements to operating system design. Pretending that these innovations aren't useful to you is not the best way to improve your kernel.

  8. We don't need another hero by Queer+Boy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    we don't need to know the way home.

    I have to admit that I haven't been following Linus's interviews too closely as of late, but I do remember reading in 1996 or 1997 (when I first tried to install Linux) about why he created it; he did it for himself.

    He wanted UNIX for his PC because he thought DOS was crappy.

    He had a lot of people appreciate his idea and even make him a Geek Icon. Hey that's pretty exciting stuff for a young geek to have lots of other geeks look at you in awe.

    Eventually the reality of what you are doing sets in. It's not a hobby anymore and you are not doing it for yourself anymore. People depend on you to run their businesses, they want you to lead an OS holy war, so to speak.

    Eventually you either let the crowd push you to insanity, or you have to decide not to care what everyone is screaming at you, and you have to remember why you started all of it in the first place.

    Linus is right, though, he shouldn't really be caring much what everyone else is doing. Linux should be it's own product and not the "me too" product that it has become.

    --
    Not since Marie-Antoinette played milkmaid has looking simple and honest been so fake and complicated.
  9. So he annoys the faithful by proving himself morta by Shivetya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So he annoys the faithful by proving himself a mortal?

    I never had the misconception he was out to slay the evil Microsoft or other such competitors. He has always been "the author of Linux", nothing more, and certainly nothing less.

    This interview simply confirms it, he really is just trying to make it better. He isn't at WAR with anyone, he isn't into that grandstanding.

    Maybe a few people here could take a lesson from his interview. Then, maybe you might know what it is all about.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  10. You gotta love the focus. by Unknown+Bovine+Group · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You gotta love the focus.

    Linus on the competition:
    I don't actually follow other operating systems much.

    Linus on .Net, Hailstorm and other M$ attempts at digital domination:
    See my answer about not caring what the competition does

    Linus on Linux vs GNU/Linux:
    I don't mind what rms calls the system...I really couldn't care less.

    Linus on the marketing of Linux in the years to come:
    I don't use a marketing eye, I simply don't care.

    Linus rules the kernel, and the kernel is good. His ability to avoid distraction, rhetoric and bullshit is highly commendable.

    Of course if we all had that kind of focus then slashdot wouldn't have any comments, now would it?

    --
    m00.
    1. Re:You gotta love the focus. by nomadic · · Score: 4, Insightful


      His ability to avoid distraction, rhetoric and bullshit is highly commendable.

      He doesn't care what RMS calls it...

      ...but he thinks his reasons for doing so are invalid.

      He doesn't follow other operating systems development...

      ...but he finds Windows XP and FreeBSD uninteresting on a technical level. Guess he DOES follow them to a certain extent.

      Sounds to me like he DOES care about these things.

  11. Linus has the RIGHT not to care. by sl3xd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Quite frankly, Linus is writing code. He is contributing to Free Software.

    The vast majority of Free Software advocates are exactly that - advocates. They aren't developing code, they aren't reading the source to make improvements.

    Free Software isn't about anything philosophical. It's about software and being able to share it to build upon itself. After that, it doesn't matter.

    Aside from some work in the HURD, RMS isn't a software developer anymore. He has become a philosopher, trying like Socrates to convert others to his way of thinking.

    Linus is coding, creating usable technology. It's HIS technology that acted as the catalyst in the Free Software world. Without Linux, GNU would still be a rather obscure name that many computer scientists don't even recognize. Sure, the GNU tools allowed Linux to start off sooner, but there was nothing special about the GNU tools at the time Linux was created -- save that it was free (gratuis), and our beloved Finn could afford them on a student's budget.

    The coders have the right to make the names and use them however they please. The philosophers are only being hypocritical by making any attempt at changing that.
    Linux doesn't owe GNU anything. The GNU project gave Linux a tiny stepladder. But Linux gave GNU a Saturn V Rocket.

    --
    -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
  12. So, what's the problem? by Bilbo · · Score: 4, Insightful
    So... if you have old, highly specialized hardware that only works on old drivers, then why do you need to update to a new kernel? You know, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" Offer your "solutions" as a turn-key box.

    On the other hand, if you aren't strictly dependent on specialized hardware, then scrap your old stuff and spend a couple of bucks to buy modern hardware that IS supported.

    --
    Your Servant, B. Baggins
  13. Re:Keeping up with kernels by fgodfrey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Changing the API often will result in companies that *do* opensource drivers to drop support as well. If there's a valid technical reason to change API's, great - go for it. Otherwise, you're pulling the exact same kind of crap that Microsoft does to try to force people to use their platform and that people on this forum regularly complain about. If I were a product manager and got told "you're going to have to have a developer spend 2 weeks rewriting some code because some guy decided to break the API for no good reason", I would *not* be a happy camper.

    --
    Go Badgers! -- #include "std/disclaimer.h"
  14. Re:FreeBSD by lamontg · · Score: 5, Insightful
    In all seriousness, *is* there anything in FreeBSD that's of particular technical interest?

    Softupdates? KSE? SMPng? KQueues? They're all worthy of discussion, and not only that but Linus has discusses kqueues on linux-kernel in the past, and while putting down the BSD interface as being over complex, he hasn't managed to get any similar into Linux last I checked. I'd really like to hear what Linus has to say about KSEs vs. clone() as well. And SMPng is doing some very interesting things with giving interrupts a context so that you can use adaptive mutex locks in them to increase scalability -- I'd appreciate hearing Linus' opinion on those as well.

    I have a bad feeling, though, that Linus would take his usual tack of being casually dismissive of what other OSes do, while not really adding anything useful to the larger ongoing discusssion. And I'm sorry if people feel that statement is flamebait, but I've read linux-kernel and seen Linus behave this way. He needs to mature a bit and give credit to other people's work, even though he might disagree with it.

    kernels are essentially a solved problem, and future interesting stuff will be going on above the kernel level, not in it.

    That's incredibly naive. There's a lot of interesting stuff still to do in kernel development. If you think that kernels are "finished" maybe that is because you're spending your time in the Linux world too much?