Slashdot Mirror
2.4 Maintainer Marcelo Tosatti Answers Your Questions
1) list of changes for the common folk
by e40
One thing that is really missing is a list of changes in each kernel release that is meant to be consumed by the masses. The "changelogs" that are offered up are sorely lacking for us non-kernel hackers. What I'd like to see is a prose description of the changes in each version. Something like Release notes for 2.2.18 by Alan Cox [linux.org.uk] is a step in the right direction, but some of it is even a little too technical. For example, in the above document, set_current_state
* Fixed potential SMP race
means little to me and probably a lot of other people. Under what condition does this occur? The question why should I care about this change? should be answered for each entry.
How do you feel about doing something like this?
MT: I agree on that the changelog is "not for end users."
As I've seen several requests, I'll try to do more extended changelogs.
However, please note that right now I'm giving higher priority to fixing problems than to writing extended changelogs.
2) diary
by Lennie
Do you have a diary, like Alan Cox we can read?
Because we all like to know, if you'll actually be doing what your gonna promise now :)
MT: No I don't, sorry...
3) Kernel growth -- is it a problem?
by connorbd
While I am a passionate Linux supporter, I have also come to the conclusion that kernel bloat is likely to be a major issue fairly soon. It appears to have been the case for some time that =486 systems Need Not Apply, and Red Hat in particular has become a rather memory-hungry distro (it won't even install on my 16MB Pentium system, though I doubt this is really a kernel issue). The end result is that Linux seems slowly to be growing out of the lower-end used-server-in-a-closet market that helped it get so big in the first place.
My question: I presume kernel bloat, both in terms of code size and resource demands, can impact heavily on maintainability. Do you see this as a significant issue for the future, how much of a problem is it, and is it something that can be easily addressed without tearing apart the code base and reorganizing it from the ground up?
MT: Core kernel bloat is a _very_ bad problem. However, I'm pretty confident Linus is not going to allow that on 2.5, though.
About more drivers/fses being added to the kernel, well, thats a bad problem for maintenance.
All we can do about it is to make sure all accepted code to the kernel is clean, simple, and well designed to make maintenance easier later...
4) code control
by brer_rabbit
Have you thought about putting your changes under some sort of version control software? If you started putting the kernel/patches under CVS, maybe the rest of the kernel crowd would follow.
MT: I'm releasing pre patches now pretty often. However, I could export my local CVS, yes.
I might do that in the future.
5) Any plans to improve documenting the kernel?
by Carnage4Life
Currently the Linux kernel is filled with functions that are either poorly documented or completely undocumented. One of the purported benefits of Free Software is that many developers can jump in and help yet when you have functions like __free_pages_ok [linux.no] in page_alloc.c that are important, complex yet the only comment is:
"Buddy system. Hairy. You really aren't expected to understand this."
Doesn't this somehow defeat the point of the source being available in the first place? Basically the question I have to ask is this, "I have flirted with the thought of sending comment only patches to the kernel to further help people understand certain subtleties (e.g. why the pprev and next pointers in user_struct are not what they seem) in the source code especially CS students who are learning about the kernel in operating systems classes. If someone were to start such a program would such patches be accepted into the kernel?
MT: Yes, I would accept such patches as long as I agree with the documentation _and_ as long as I have time to read all patches :)
6) A pretty generic question
by archen
How do you view Linux in the scheme of things? Mainly where do you think the niche of Linux is now, and where will it be years from now. How do you view the direction Linux tends to be taking compared to other OS's (Windows XP, FreeBSD, etc) - ["direction" is up to what ever you personally interpret it to be BTW]
MT: Linux has a lot of "niches": the embedded market, the home users market, the enterprise market: Handling all of those "niches" in the best possible way is a very nice challenge.
I don't see any "direction" to Linux, though: It can work well on several niches.
7) Why you?
by CmdrPinkTaco
This is not intended as a flame or a troll, more of an interview style question. I figure since we are the people who are putting our trust in this person to handle *our* kernel, that this should also be our chance to learn about the person responsible.
What makes you think that you can handle maintaining the Linux Kernel? What qualifications do you have and why should we (the people) trust you with the Linux kernel.
I realize that this is actually two questions, but they more or less go together in one answer.
MT: I think they chose me because I can deal with different people without ego fights. I usually avoid conflicts and instead I try to solve problems.
About qualifications: I've been working at Conectiva for some time (4 years) as a software developer. I'm working together with technical support, which makes me have an idea of usual end users problems/needs.
8) Patches
by return 42
Linus likes very small patches, everything broken down into little chunks of functionality. Alan is ok with bigger patches. What do you like and dislike in the patches people send you?
MT: I prefer patches which touch specific things only: what I really hate are patches which touch several kernel parts.
9) CML2, cvs, kdb, crypto and more
by iamsure
If during the course of your maintainership CML2 proves very successful (as I beleive it already has) would you consider using it instead of CML1?
Also, would you consider moving crypto into the main tree in the near future? Debian has, Redhat will "soon" ...
Would you consider using bitkeeper, cvs, or even complete changelogs with proper attribution of WHICH merges took place?
And finally, would you consider FINALLY bringing kdb into the main kernel? Linus doesnt want it, but he doesnt want it because he doesnt see the value. He didnt say he banned it ...
MT: About CML: Sure, I may consider including it in the future. Not now, though.
About crypto: I want to be out of legal problems. Sorry.
kdb: Maybe. Not now, though.
10) Alan Cox and politics
by melquiades
Alan Cox's stand on the changelog is clearly not only a matter of personal protection, but a political statement. He has chosen an issue that is tremendously important to Linux, free software, and software developers everywhere, and certainly it's right for him to be pursuing it.
But is the Linux kernel the right forum for politics? Do you feel that it's a bad idea to involve the kernel in politics -- a slippery slope in which the software itself becomes a political pawn? Or would you say that the kernel -- and all software -- has already become a political pawn, and Cox's actions are entirely justified given that free software's existence is under increasing threat?
MT: I'll try to avoid involving the kernel in political questions.
11) Sound drivers
by BlowCat
The sound drivers are very poorly written. A lot of code is duplicated. Not all drivers support some ioctls. Every driver has its peculiarities, e.g. some drivers reset dsp to mono, 8bit on DSP_RESET, some don't. Some support /dev/audio, some don't.
Not having ALSA in 2.4.x means no good sound support in the stable kernel for another year of two. Do you plan to integrate ALSA into the 2.4 branch? If yes, will it happen after it's done on the 2.5 branch?
MT: I do not plan to integrate ALSA on 2.4.x.
12) How do you plan to handle the big companies?
by hansendc
As all of us know, many large companies are putting large amounts of resources toward Linux. 2.4 will continue to be important to these companies because it is the version currently being shipped with the distributions, and will continue to be shipped for at east a year or two.
How are you going to deal with the submissions from people like IBM and SGI who are going to want to make significant changes to 2.4?
MT: If their changes are non intrusive and I agree with the way they are coded, sure I'll apply them. Why not?
13) Stability vs Features
by azaroth42
How do you intend to decide which new patches should be added to 2.4, the stable tree, and which are not to be included as being more appropriate to just 2.5, the unstable development tree? For example, do new or updated device drivers rank more highly than VM updates?
MT: I'm really trying to avoid new features which are intrusive: Those ones are for 2.5.
New features which are non intrusive are OK.
14) Threads
by Exmet Paff Daxx
What are your thoughts about threads? Specifically, do you support Linus's "Context of Execution" generality with clone() or are you going to focus more on plain POSIX pthreads compliance?
Any chance of Alan Cox's multi-threaded post-mortem debugging patch which dumps multiple core files for each lightweight process (LWP) making it into the kernel? How about support for post mortem debugging of multithreaded core files in general (right now there is zero support).
Any rants about threading as a general topic would work.
MT: I do support Linus's "Context of Execution" idea, yes.
About Alan's multi-threaded post-mortem debugging patch: I haven't read it yet. But I might apply it.
15) Age a question?
by debrain
If what I've read is correct, you are the youngest maintainer for this kernel. Do you have any feelings on a social level, regarding much of the peer review and critism will come from people who are older? (and very possibly set in their ways, and potentially intimidating)
MT: I don't have any feelings wrt age. I just hope that older people don't take that into account.
16) Expectations
by MikeBabcock
In the time you've been aware of or been using Linux, how have your expectations for what it ought to be or eventually become changed? I know in the time I've used it I'd never expected it, for example, to become a desktop OS but rather a good server or embedded product. What did you expect when you first started with Linux, and what do you expect now?
MT: I expected it to be a server system when I started using it.
Now I expect it to be a Unix system which can work in a lot of different environments. :)
17) Hit by a bus
by moonboy
I'd hate to stray from the status quo where standard interview questions are concerned, so in keeping with it, I ask:
What's it like knowing that, if (God forbid) Linus and Alan were hit by a bus, you might be "The Man"?
Hey, someone had to ask.
MT: I don't know, dude.
18) Re:Do you use a distribution?
by bfree
To rewrite the above question the way I'd like it asked:
What operating systems and platforms do you personally use and which ones do you also use (and why)?
MT: I use Linux for work and sometimes I use Windows to play games.
Do you run a common environment on all your machines (in as far as possible) or do you run different things in different places and which environments do you prefer for what?
MT: I do run Linux on all of my machines. I like to take a look at other OSes when I have time...
What development tools do you use (especially for the kernel), would you do anything differebtly for the kernel (like make it compile with other compilers) if you could (or will you) and would you like to (or will you) place the Linux stable kernel into CVS or another version control system?
MT: I use vi for editting source code and gcc to compile the kernel. :)
No, I'm not going to put the kernel in any kind of version control system because I have to know what goes into the kernel.
One thing which I'm going to do, and which matters, is the use of STP in each -pre release of the kernel.
I hope the SGI guys can get STP stable and working well soon.
Do you feel any personal preferences for anything might actually be in anyway reflected in your work as the stable kernel maintainer?
MT: No.
Do you have a good lawyer?
MT: No. Actually, I don't have a lawyer at all and I hope I'll never have to use one on Linux related issues.
Are you planing on travelling to the U.S.A.> (for all I know you live there, excuse my ignorance:-)? [Note: Marcelo lives in Brazil.]
MT: No. I may go to some congress, though. Not sure yet, though.
Have you experience dealing with politicians, business leaders and large groups and do you see this as a part of your job description? MT: I do not have experience dealing with politicians, business leaders or large groups. I see that as part of my job description, yes. I hope I can learn that with time...
When you stop maintaing the stable kernel, what would you like people to be saying about your reign?
MT: That it works well. ;)
..if his code is as terse and to-the-point as this interview, the kernel's gonna shrink by at least 75%.
Hate trolls? Troll 'em back...at home!
Take a break, he's 18 and English is his second language.
How are you going to deal with the submissions from people like IBM and SGI who are going to want to make significant changes to 2.4?
MT: If their changes are non intrusive and I agree with the way they are coded, sure I'll apply them. Why not?
Whats he mean by "... and I agree with the way they are coded"? If it works and has nothing bad in it, why would he reject it?
An optimist believes we live in the best world possible; a pessimist fears this is true.
However, please note that right now I'm giving higher priority to fixing problems than to writing extended changelogs.
Poor/Incomplete/Out of date documentation is the Achilles Heel of open source.
The best thing a maintainer of a stable kernel tree can hope will be said after his reign is:
Nothing. The less that ends up being said, the better a job he's done.
'Storm a toilet, AC' = 'Marcelo Tosatti'.
Spread the word.
Come on! This guy is the kernel maintainer? I know I will probably get modded down as flamebait because I am not singing his praises about being concise and to the point, but that interview was awful! I can't believe he is suppose to be the point of contact of anybody (read IBM, HP etc) that want to submit patches to be in the 2.4 tree. It looks like he spent about 10 minutes answering these questions, I can only hope he takes his job maintaining the kernel seriously. This interview certainly doesn't instill confidence in his ability to maintain the tree.
You asked Marcelo about everything from the influence of politics (age and otherwise) to his working enviroment and approach to maintainership
No I didn't.
"Do you guys read your own site?"
-no.
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Does anyone really expect to be able to run the latest kernel on their 386/486 machines? Let's think about it: Your system was built and purchased probably between 1989 and 1992. It is now almost 2002. That's really not a bad run for something so antiquated. Should the people who work on the modern 2.4 (and now 2.5) kernels really have to bend over backwards to support such ancient hardware? If you want a kernel for your 10-year-old hardware, use 2.2 or 2.0. If you want to take advantage of new hardware, use 2.4 or 2.5. Why is it that people can't understand this?
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
I can't seem to make sense of the answers to questions #4 and #18, about putting the kernel in CVS or similar system. Marcelo wrote, in response to Q#4: ;^)
However, I could export my local CVS, yes. I might do that in the future.
And then, to Q18:
No, I'm not going to put the kernel in any kind of version control system because I have to know what goes into the kernel.
Last time I used it, CVS was a version control system. So, am I the only one to think this question can't be answered with "yes" and "no" at the same time and still make sense? To me, this is just plain weird, and if this was a "real" interview, I'd think bad thinks about the interviewer. Now I guess I'll have to settle for the editors, as a few others in the thread already have. Heh.
main(O){10<putchar(4^--O?77-(15&5128 >>4*O):10)&&main(2+O);}
Man, someone out there sure feels threatened .. hard to believe someone is so worried as to spend the time pasting this form-post in /. threads.
...
One wonders what this guys trying to defend. I wish this guy who let us know for whom he works, and what he does
"Old man yells at systemd"
I think he meant he wants to use LTP, not STP.
STP isn't much use for testing kernel pre-releases.
OlympicSponsor: Seriously, can you give us a breakdown of how much time each editor spends actually reading the site they nominally run? Like, time spent clicking on user comments?
CowboyNeal: I know from our internal discussion lists and channels, that all of us are constantly reading the site, but as for a detailed breakdown, I'd have no idea where to start.
Segmond: Have you ever used "super moderating power" to mod down posts attacking slashdot editors...?
CowboyNeal: As for "super moderating power", I know I could go into the database and moderate like crazy, but my ethics won't allow me to do so. Also, I don't usually read comments attached to stories.
Truth is, most of the editors seem to have gotten completely bored with the site but for whatever reasons feel compelled to keep plugging on. They've long since given up caring about it and seem mystified that any of the readers would care either.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Marcelo actually answered a few more questions that didn't appear in the main article, and were cut to save space. Here they are:
What do you think is an appropriate length for interview answers?
MT:17
Can you elaborate?
MT:no, sorry
Do you think that people who write long interview answers are compensating for other shortcomings?
MT: Yes, definitely
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
What operating systems and platforms do you personally use and which ones do you also use (and why)?
MT: I use Linux for work and sometimes I use Windows to play games.
Man, sounds kind of like why I still have the Win box at home - to play games. I'm wondering if/when he'll finally decide to switch - I'm expecting to dump my last Win box when I get the Mandrake 8.1 with The Sims bundle (WINE plus DirectX support).
I know that people believe we should all play Linux games, but the reality is that most of us still have Windows cause of the games. We don't really care why we can finally get rid of it, but we need something workable.
-
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
What he said is that hes Not going to make a writable cvs available to anyone else: all contributions will have come come as patches in email.
In summary he gets cvs and you dont.
Linus lives in Silicon Valley, Alan in Swansea, Wales. That's one monster bus.
Marcelo, please discuss what exactly this great responsibility means to you in terms of your childhood and your relationship with your parents.
...
MT: it's groovy...
Tell us your psychological approach to kernel development vis-a-vis great 19th century philosophers.
MT: not now. maybe later. sorry...
Some people have likened coding to a visual-perceptual dialectic where the dynamic energy of structure versus entropy result in communal "oneness." What are your thoughts on this?
MT: Code is green...
Is there anything else you'd like to add to this interview, given that you now have a chance to speak to the large slashdot community? Any particular issues you feel strongly about?
MT:
One of the features of Linux has always been you won't need a hardware upgrade every 5 years for your servers.
being able to say it runs on a 386/486 has always been a great way to get the point across. Sure we can say 'it runs on a p90! but that just doesn't have the same kick.
Personally I don't have a problem with slow obsolence 10 year old hardware support in the 'newer' kernels, as long as its only with hardwaare at least 10 years old. To do obsolence of support any quicked pputs us in the samw league as MS. meaning we can't point our fingers t MS and say "See they made you buy new hardware, AGAIN"
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Man get with it!
The thing is that I would never dream of using a 486 to surf the net, send/receive e-mail, play games etc. But I DO use a 486 as the router for my network.
Why would I want to put a fairly modern machine in charge of something that doesn't require it?
I love the fact that I can install slackware on my old 486 and have it forward packets for me. If Linux didn't run on it I would have to have used one of my celeron boxes that I instead gave my kid. What a waste that would have been!
--
Garett
T&H interview: 23 months ago
CNeal: 9.5 months ago
JK: 22 months ago
Okay, CowboyNeal probably has nothing new to add, but the other interviews are so old that it's worth revisiting. Hell, there are nearly duplicate "Ask Slashdot" questions that are only six months old (and answerable via gg:ask slashdot).
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
I really like the idea of better changelogs explaining fixes and problems to the "end users". Granted, the "end users" compiling their own kernels are generally not typical computer users... some changelog lines are easy to understand while others aren't. The understanding is based solely on the users knowledge of the inner workings of the system.
I don't necessarily think that end user style changelogs should be of much concern to core kernel developers. Obviously, they should be concentrating on fixing problems. However, I have an idea that should make everybody happy...
A group of kernel savvy & knowledgeable systems experts should get together and form an open changelog review project. This project could work alongside the core kernel team for the sole purpose of documenting kernel changes, answering the questions of why, where, how, etc.
This would achieve great kernel documentation, and avoid putting that added stress on the kernel team. Thoughts?
Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
I'm running Linux on my 486 which I bought in 95. It serves just fine as a firewall, proxy server and a small scale mail/web/ftp server.
I have not noticed *any* kernel bloat (and I've been running Linux for a loooong time). All the bloat is in the apps (especially the GUI gizmos). I'm surprised this question was even asked (but then again this is slashdot...)
___
If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
I have an active interest in Linux on Nubus PowerMacs. They were new in the 1994 era. Support for Linux on these machines is still spotty, and you have to jump through hoops to get something to work. However, it is a perfectly adequate machine once you get done.
One might have to build a custom kernel to fit within the limitations of the hardware. But it's a case of only the newest kernel being able to run on the old hardware at all. I'm glad that people are actively developing for it, otherwise I'd be unable to learn to use Linux because I don't have new hardware available.
Constitutionally Correct
It does run fine on 368/486 - if you run the software appropriate for that system. KDE2 is gonna suck goat balls, but so is XP. The difference is, you can trim down Linux to work great. On a 486, you can use Blackbox, on a 386, I'd stick with textmode apps - there are plenty of good editors, browsers, etc, still in active development for textmode in Linux. Significantly fewer for XP (and many of them are "Unixy" things like shells and telnet clients).
Use a setup appropriate to the hardware, and Linux works fine... the Jailbait distro (so named because it's under 16 megs, haha), is very full featured, and there are "routers on a disk". Also, don't forget that 2.0.36 and kin are still out there, downloadable and usable. Unlike Win98, which just went unsupported and realistically unavailable, old *and* stable kernels are available. And then there are specialty forks - I think the one for the 16 Mhz Dragonball processor is an amusing example (a.k.a., Linux on Palm).
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
m00.
Although I largely agree with you (I mean, 512MB of RAM is now 40$ @ Frys), an other reason for keeping the kernel small is cache.
L2 cache is still fairly small, and the more you can do inside it the better. The performance hit of a cache miss is bigger than you think.
But, yeah, if the reason would be to keep it running on 10-20 year systems, that's wrong.
Yes
Level Control Systems Matrix 3 has a embedded linux ppc system with 100baseT and UW-SCSI for real time audio system.
--jeff
ipv6 is my vpn
I've read longer haikus than some of those answers! I guess it makes sense though, he's the 2.4 kernel maintainer, not the 2.4 kernel spokesperson.
I have to agree with several posts that say inaccurate documentation is OSS Achilles' Heel. Sure, you could just jump in the fire and learn, but why not help folks out with some documentation?
What good is an OSS project if no devs join the construction effort and no users can figure out how to make it work? I'm not saying that you need a big fancy website and tons of UML diagrams, but don't just dump a pile of code and a makefile in my lap and expect me to be as giddy as a schoolgirl about the project.
it's not going to stop until you wise up, no it's not going to stop. so just give up.
Remember back in college when the professors took off points for lack of documentation. Comments from them usually include something as, "Sure you know how it works, but what about me." It was the first commandment of programming. So I think it should be one of the first changes to be made by commiters and developers posting patches. That includes all mighty Cox and Tourvalds taking some time to document some routine functions in the source code tree. There is some commenting that is relevant and some that has no purpose being there at all. BSD people should hush up too. They are just as bad. Yeah I know I should be willing to sit down with a pepsi and read through yards and yards of code. I shouldn't have too. I should be able to get an idea of the logic behind a fuction from your documentation. grade 60% you fail, repeat the class....
Since then, slashdot has seen the fall of the dot-com, and the VA/OSDN changes.
Another thing, in response to
Truth is, most of the editors seem to have gotten completely bored with the site but for whatever reasons feel compelled to keep plugging on. They've long since given up caring about it and seem mystified that any of the readers would care either.
Its ok to get bored with (hobby) projects, but, god, they get paid to run this site! Its not a hobby they can just get bored with, if they don't like it change jobs and let someone else run the site!
BTW - on Katz's interview, "Preaching to a Choir" question, in his response he says:
So I stay here because Im happy, stimulated and welcome
I'm surprised the trolls never hit that...
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
One thing people tend to forget about when talking about the ability for Linux to run on older hardware is the embedded market. If we (I work for MontaVista so "we" seems the right term) can't run Linux on 386-486 hardware, it probably won't run on that (hypothetical) new $15/unit low-power x86 SBC that one of our customers wants to use.
If Linux is going to be suitable for a wide variety of niche markets, it needs to be scalable down as well as up.
What's the deal with Alsa? I mean Suse has been behind it for quite some time now. The code seems fairly mature these days. People have been talking about merging it into the Kernal for years. What's the deal? Has OSS really jumped ahead recently in features, or does Alsa have a lot of bugs we don't know about?
...because they're the folks who like simple, straightforward and correct answers without extra fluff. By contrast, those who insist on being fed bullshit (why? as a respect thing?) make the other half of the userbase (I almost said "community", but that'd be wrong) all too visible.
I can't that you can blame him, personally I don't run windows, but I also don't play many games... However, almost all of the really good games at the moment are either console or PC only.
Most of the rest of the interview was pretty much what you would expect anyone to say, this is the only bit that jumped out and said "boo" to me. If we can keep him to his promises though Marcelo looks to be every bit as good a maintainer as Alan and Dave.
ALSA is a major code change and will not happen on a minor release. Expect it for inclusion only with development trees (and then rather early on).
I won't believe any claims regarding this until it happens however. There has been a push to include it for a long time.
Luckily the project has gotten past it's biggest old problem, which was constantly, drastically, and suddenly changing the API, breaking many programs and pissing lots of people off, not to mention making it completely in flux.
we'll see
Many programmers (yes, I am guilty too), take inexpensive hardware as license to write ineficient code. So what if the end user needs more RAM or a faster processor....thats progress!
This attitude only works because end users don't realize the benefit of non-bloatware. The replies to the above post all mentioned being able to run the kernel on an old 386/486 computer....fine, thats a worthy goal. I do it myself. However, what happens when the same "removal of bloat" is applied to regular software, as to that run on old hardware?
I dare anyone to say that the above four points are in any way a Bad Thing [tm]! I don't know about everyone else reading Slahdot, but I'd love for my computer to run even 5% faster without any changes to the hardware....even (especially?) on my new 1.0 GHz / 512 MB RAM / 48 GB HD system.
"I might not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it!" --Voltaire
This was the best non-interview slashdot has had in a long time. Let me illustrate his "interviewing" style to you.
Question: Will you introduce XXX into the kernel?
Answer: I will do the job of kernel maintainer.
Question 2: Do you like cheese?
Answer: I will do the job of kernel maintainer.
Question 3: Do you know your pants are on fire.
Answer: Only if it is in regards to maintaining the kernel.
I have seen more personality on a head of moldy lettuce. But hey, good luck to you man, and don your flame retardant suit, you are going to need it.
One Token Ring to Rule them All, One Search Engine to Find Them, One WAN to bring them in, and TCP/IP Bind them...
no, that was win95 that went unsupported. IIRC, win98 won't go unsupported 'till 2003.
Actually, it's not inevitable. The core kernel code hasn't grown significantly since 2.2 which was released in early 1999.
By the core I mean everything except drivers.
I know this really, shouldn't matter; if you're qualified, you should be given a chance. But this person looks *very* young. He must have spent quite a significant part of his life in front of a CRT. That's not a good way to make a balanced human being.
Why was parent modded funny? Any step to improve OSS documentation at this point deserves support, imo.
-Kraft
Live and let live
You're rather missing the point. Linux is a 386 operating system, and should (with the proper trimming of utilities) still be able to run on a 386. Believe it or not, some of us can't even afford $500 for a shitbox Celeron and are stuck with what we've got (in my case a $200 P2 as well as the P100 I mentioned in my interview question). That market is probably a lot larger than you think it is.
Look at it this way: yes, I can use a 1.x kernel, but forget about things like up-to-date security, USB support (a lot of old Pentium MMX boxen have the ports), etc. Who can someone in that situation turn to but Linux?
/Brian
Marcelo gave a good interview to a Brasilian magazine, talking about his self and how he met linux. the interview is in portugese but you can use some sort of translator on it.. Folow the link: http://epoca.globo.com/semanal/_materias/entrevist a.htm
Okay, fine: the interview was a little dry. Perhaps, 5 years from now, we'll have trouble remembering it.
What the hell do you expect from a kernel maintainer? Trust me, you don't want revved-up and passionate...because he'll make revved-up and passionate mistakes. Marcello wasn't hired because of his strong views on the future of technology...he probably just does his job really well. I wish I could say the same about many people I've worked with.
This wasn't just plain terrible, this was fancy terrible. This was terrible with raisins in it. - Dorothy Parker
... posts like this are obvious representations of old farts with some serious insecurities.
:~)
;-P
Ok, ok, don't get bent. I'm not putting him down for being a teenager. And I'm 29 BTW. I may be insecure but not about my age
But you have to think for a second that a teenager is maintaining the freaking main Linux Kernel already. That's some pretty serious pressure. Then again it's probably just computer program to him so it shouldn't matter right? Don't come cryn' to me when the kid turns out like Gary Coleman
Many of the attacks on Marcello here are silly. Try answering an interview in French or something and I bet your answers are short and not particularly sweet.
:-) Good luck Marcello!
On the other hand I am not sure Marcello was the correct choice for 2.4 maintainer (no offense intended... read on). In my opinion Alan should have handed the relatively mature codebase that is 2.2 on to Marcello so he could get to grips with maintaining something that is already pretty mature. Giving him 2.4 is kinda throwing him in at the deep end because we all know it has a long way to go before it is what it could be. Also, with 2.4, SGI, IBM and all the others will be hounding him with patches that they want in the kernel, this would have been less of a problem with 2.2.
However... I love to be proved wrong.
(PS: I think the biggest complement a maintainer can get is to be told that you want him to maintain the next kernel release too. Thanks Alan.)
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Does anyone really expect to be able to run the latest kernel on their 386/486 machines?
I run the latest NetBSD kernel on a 486. Doesn't seem to be a problem.
So far as I can tell, there's no new advances coming down the pike in VESA or ISA cards. It's not like there's huge drifts of new code that need to be written for my shitty old Dell.
Incidentally, I thought the big advantage of Linux was that it works on old hardware. At least, that's what the zealots keep telling me.
--saint
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
That's precisely why Linux versioning works the way it does. If a 2.0.x security or bug patch is written, it can still be accepted. No new features, but that's why it's been moved on from. Same for 2.2.x, and now 2.4.x (although at first, some of the "bug" patches are really feature enhancements to the point that they are almost new fatures). If you want to stay secure, you don't have to stay modern - you just have to stay up to date.... which is neigh axiomatic when dealing with security.
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
I am talking about Linux, not a distribution. I am talking about ther kernel - if you are using a premade distro, the comments don't apply - they are aimed at the people *making* the distros.
Basically, the 2.4 kernel when stripped down to the requirements have no problems running on a 386 or 486.
Absolutely - I'm talking about 16 Mhz processors with 8 megs of RAM, and *their* ilk - embedded and archaic systems. On a full blown, general purpose computer, 2.4 will fit and run nicely.
Are we approaching an agreement?
I think we always were - I was referring more to the kernel going "below" the level of a 386 when I referred to the 2.0.x series. That, for specific deticated uses, it is still available as a code base, not for "Joe Smith" on his old 486. And we broke down on the classic lines - I meant Linux as in the kernel code, you read Linux as in the complete system. There are a fair number of deticated distros out there using old stable kernels for everything from routers on a disk to MMU-less archetechtures. Most are heavily patched into custom beasts.
And the bit about usersapce programs eating RAM - yup, that's why I advocated textmode apps for 386es... they tend to be *much* more svelt then even their Xlib counterparts.
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien