Rik van Riel on Kernels, VMs, and Linux

Andrea Scrimieri writes " An Interesting interview with Rik van Riel, the kernel developer, in which he talks about the Linux's VM, particurarly about his own implementation (which was recently adopted in Alan Cox's tree). With some controversy towards Linus Torvalds. "

Comments

ohhh

[Quasar1999]

Come on, you all know that any talk about the Linux VM is going to go over the heads of 95% of slashdot readers... :P

Re:Wondering...

[garcia]

yup but at least we don't have a single moron running the show telling everyone else what to do. This way at least there is some internal competition. I suppose in the short-term dictatorship works the best but in the long run free ideas work best (Hitler/Stalin rapid Industrialization vs. Free World)

I don't particularly like the comments made by this kid but I don't think he is entirely wrong for doing so.

CVS isn't decent

[kaisyain]

The problem is that there isn't a decent multi-patch versioning system out there

Uh, yes there are. Perforce, aide-de-camp, bitkeeper, and others all do this just fine. I haven't used squeak much, but I think this is also how the built-in version control in their smalltalk image works as well. Every change management system that uses changesets works pretty much exactly this way.

CVS basically sucks, which is why some people are trying to replace it. It only gets used because it is popular and free, not because it is technically superior. The only thing it is better than is RCS/SCCS. Every other possible solution is no worse, and usually much better, than CVS.

Re:Good interview, fun drama

[laserjet]

I liken this to Vi vs. Emacs. Both suck for usability (admit it), and to this day we continue to butt heads about them. I use vi, and like it more than Emacs, but I am adult enough to admit they both have some of the worst user interfaces available today.

not trolling, or starting a debate, just being honest.