Slashdot Mirror
Linus Torvalds On Linux 2.6
ceebABC writes "Linus Torvalds talks about the upcoming Linux 2.6 kernel, in an interview with eWEEK. Linus discusses the scalability and memory management in the new kernel. They also have a story about what's supposed to be in Linux 3.0."
"Blessed are the poor in threshold: for theirs is the Kingdom of the Page-Lengthening and Page-Widening Posts.
"Blessed are they that mourn the death of *BSD: for they shall be comforted with an ultradense Linux server from VA Linux, now sold by California Digital Corporation.
"Blessed are the posters of smug one-liners: for they shall inherit an Account Capped at 50.
"Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after The First Post: for they shall have the Third or Fourth Post.
"Blessed are the karma whores: for they shall obtain "Score: 5, Insightful".
"Blessed are those who dismiss out-of-hand: for they shall fail to see the Point of the Original Post.
"Blessed are those who seek to associate themselves with the latest techno-fad: for they shall be called 3L33T for at least Another Half Hour.
"Blessed are they which are persecuted for their own self-righteousness' sake: for theirs is the Kingdom of "Ask Slashdot".
"Blessed are the over-eager, who believe that Open Source is a social movement heralding the rise of a new generation: for they shall not realize that There Are No Sacred Cows.
"Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for the sake of your Favorite Operating System.
"Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in Heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
THIS IS THE WORD OF THE LORD
that the 3.0 article was written over a month ago, and Linus has since decided that call it 2.6. Not that the version number matters in any way whatsoever, but I'm sure people will continue to argue over it nonetheless.
Is your browser retarded?
I guess this guy must have written a pretty big Linux app to get such a lot of coverage. What does this "kernel" program do and where can I download it?
Do tell, please! Thanks!
Signed,
Walrus J. Retard, IV
If he freezes the code for the 12th anniversary of getting his first computer for use with linux, one can only imagine what he gets his wife for their wedding anniversary.
i'll wait for linux 3.1... i hear there will be windowing build in then, with a way to exit to shell if you still need to use the command line
MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
Will it have workgroup support? Or will that be Linux 3.11?
Linus Torvalds announced that Linux 2.6 would be renamed Linux 9.0, and would be the "Most Advanced Linux Ever."
One user was quoted as saying "All my friends and family use Linux" while another exclaimed "New Linux 9.0 is easier than ever!"
According to one source, "kernel 2.6 will address PHBs by including a 'boss key' that automatically switches the kernel to 'Fake Windows Mode'. In this mode, Linux will simulate the Windows XP-2005 environment, complete with Dancing Paperclips, bluescreens, and incessant reminders to sign up for a Microsoft Passport.
;-)
Now, geeks will be able to install Linux on their company workstations without the knowledge of their PHBs. Productivity will skyrocket, hopefully earning them a fat raise."
More details are available at http://humorix.org
I, for one, am quite excited about this, although I guess that depends on if any of you actually have a job at the moment
Either way, I'm glad to see the kernel hackers working hard to fulfill our feature requests. Here's to a great 2.6!
Cheers,
-- Eric
If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
To see whats already in 2.5, check kernel status
I am glad the mid level scsi stuff now works correctly with SAN environments but I wish opengfs and or ocfs had made it into the tree before the feature freeze. I guess for now I have to just resort to running a proprietary clustered file system.
Got Code?
2.6? Pfff. FreeBSD is already working on 5.0 and OpenBSD already released 3.2. Therefore FreeBSD is almost *twice* as good as Linux and OpenBSD is about 25% better.
Don't ask me to do the math as to how much better Windows 2000 is.
Trolling is a art,
I'll never forget my first boot into the 1.x series many, many years ago.
From that day on, I never looked at a computer the same way. Whenever friends would talk about the latest cool games or case modifications, I was never really interested; what truly grabbed my attention was exploring the depths of the Linux kernel and just learning, learning, learning.
The rest is, as they say, history. I've gained a lot from using Linux, moreso than any other person or thing that I've used so far in my short life. With that being said, I decided to donate, once again, to Linux and its related movements just as a simple "Thank You" for all the time and dedication that so many, like Linus, put into the Free/Open software movement.
Here are some quick donation links:
- FSF
- Mandrake
- KDE
- Apache
If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
I have a patch for this linux kernel thingie that I would like to submit that will be of interest to all Linux users. What this patch will do is inform you of discounts and special offers that you are elegible for. How can I submit this?
I just scanned through the discussion...every comment is either a dumb joke (sorry, I don't think talking about "Linux 3.11" is very clevar) or flamebait/trolling.
What has happened to all of the serious users? Let's talk. I'm most interested in what the new kernel will be doing for next generation hardware (FireWire 2 and USB2, not to mention BlueTooth), the new VM, and improvements in latency a la the preemptible kernel patch.
Also, the 2.4 series kernels already have so many configuration options that compiling the right kernel often takes several attempts. Anyone know how 2.6/3.0 (they are the same, right?) is going to manage kernel config as the number of modules skyrockets? Has Linus considered moving away from a monolithic kernel, or should we all just switch to HURD?
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
It's good to see the focus on issues that effect business servers with heavy load. As a desktop user it's easy to think otherwise, but...
The kernel can support most things a desktop user needs. It's the programs on top that need to be beefed up (and drivers).
As for winning the desktop war (if that interests you) then corporate is the way to start. I see tons of articles on how to get average middle aged user to install linux. It can do everything in the world, but if they don't use it at work, most people won't switch. ("I have to know windows at work, why learn anything else").
The more high power servers people see running free software (and maybe eventually their desktop) at work, the more likely they are to adopt it.
And especially in the realm of *free* software, user base is important.
-T
http://unmoldable.com W:"No one of consequence" I:"I must know" W:"Get used to disappointment"
Something forms itself from the silent void of the empty mailing lists and the noisy chaos of the crowded mailing lists. It shapes and protects us, it entertains and challenges us, it aids us in our journey through the ether world of software. It is mysterious; it is at once source code and yet object code. I do not know the name, thus I will call it the Tao of Linux.
If the Tao is great, then the box is stable. If the box is stable, then the server is secure. If the server is secure, then the data is safe. If the data is safe, then the users are happy.
In the beginning there was chaos in Unix.
Tanenbaum gave birth to MINIX. MINIX did not have the Tao.
MINIX gave birth to Linux 0.1 and it had promise.
Linux gave birth to v1.3 and it was good.
v1.3 gave birth to v2.0 and it was better.
Linux has evolved greatly from its distant cousins of the old. Linux is embodied by the Tao.
The wise user is told about the Tao and contributes to it. The average user is told about the Tao and compiles it. The foolish user is told about the Tao and laughs and asks who needs it.
If it were not for laughter, there would be no Tao.
Wisdom leads to good code, but experience leads to good use of that code.
The master Cox once dreamed that he was a Kernel. When he awoke he exclaimed: "I don't know whether I am Cox dreaming that I am a Kernel, or a Kernel dreaming that I am Cox!"
The master Linus then said: "The Tao envelopes you. You shall create great code for Linux."
"On the contrary," said Cox, "The Tao has already created the code, I will only have to find it and write it down."
A master was explaining the nature of the Tao to one of his students:
"Is the Tao in the VM subsystem?" he asked. "Yes," replied the master.
"Is the Tao in the scheduler?" he queried again. "The Tao is in the scheduler."
"Is the Tao even in the modules?". "It is even in the modules," said the master.
"Is the Tao in the Low-Latency Patch?"
The master frowned and was silent for much time.
"You fail to understand the Tao. Go away."
The Tao is the yin and the yang. It is the good and the evil, it is everything and yet it is nothing, it is the beginning and the end.
The Tao was there at the kernel compile, and it will be there when the kernel panics.
A novice user once asked a master: "Why compile in C when C++ is more popular?"
"Why a monolythic kernel when Mach is more popular?"
"And why use ReiserFS when ext2 is more popular?"
The master sighed and replied: "Why run Unix when NT is more popular?"
The user was enlightened.
A frustrated user once asked a master: "My kernel has panicked, should I post to lkml?"
"No," replied the master, "You will only bother the Tao."
"Should I rm -rf?"
"No, you will have wasted the Tao's time."
"Well should I search the web?"
"You will search for all eternity," said the master.
"Perhaps I should try FreeBSD?"
"Then you will have disgraced the Tao."
"I suppose I could try gdb," said the user.
The master smiled and replied: "Then you will have made the Tao stronger."
A stubborn user once told a master: "I run version 2.2. I always have, and I always will."
The master replied: "You are foolish and do not understand the Tao. The Tao is dynamic and ever changing. Linux strives for the perfection that is the Tao. It flows from version to version with peace."
"So my Linux does not have the Tao, so what?" said the foolish user. "Oh your Linux is of the Tao," said the master. "However, the Tao of Linux follows the Tao of the C library. One day the C library will change, and your Linux will be left behind." The user was silent.
An angry user once yelled at a master:
"My Linux has panicked! What lousy software it is, I hate it so!"
"You are insulting the Tao," said the master. "The Tao is everywhere bringing order to hundreds of networks, aiding thousands of users, and fighting that of which we call the 'lame.' Do not disrespect the Tao; however, the Tao will forgive you."
"I apologize," said the user, "And I will be more forgiving the next time the Tao fails me."
"The Tao has not failed you, it is you that has failed the Tao," said the master. "The Tao is perfect."
The Tao decides if a kernel shall compile, or if it shall abort.
The Tao decides if a kernel shall boot, or if it shall freeze.
The Tao decides if a kernel shall run, or if it shall panic.
But, the Tao does not decide if a box will have no hardware failures. That is a mystery to everyone.
A young master once approached an old master: "I have a LUG for Linux help. But, I fail to answer my students' problems; they are above me."
The master replied: "Have you taught them of the Tao?" he asked. "How it brings together man and software, yet how it distances them apart; how if flows throughout Linux and transcends its essence?"
"No," exclaimed the apprentice, "These people cannot even get the source untarred."
"Oh, said the master, "In that case, tell them to RTFM."
A master watched as an ambitious user reconstructed his Linux.
"I shall make every bit encrypted," the user said. "I shall use 2048 bit keys, three different algorithms, and make multiple passes."
The master replied: "I think it is unwise."
"Why?" asked the user. "Will my encryption harm the mighty Tao, which gives Linux life and creates the balance between kernel and processes? The mighty Tao, which is the thread that binds the modules and links them with the core? The mighty Tao, which safely guides the TCP/IP packets to and from the network card?"
"No," said the master, "It will hog too much cpu."
The core is like the part of the mind that is static. It is programmed at a child's creation and cannot be changed unless a new child is made; unless a new kernel is compiled.
The modules are like the part of the mind that is dynamic. It is reprogrammed every time one learns new knowledge; every time one learns better code.
One is yin, the other yang. Each is nothing without the other.
A novice came to lkml and inquired to all the masters there: "I wish to become a master. Must I memorize the Linux header files?"
"No," replied a master.
"Must I submit code to Bitkeeper?"
"No," replied the master.
"Must I meditate daily and dedicate my life to Linux?"
"No," replied the master again.
"Must I go on a quest to ponder the meaning of the Tao?"
"No. A master is nothing more than a student who knows something of which he can teach to other students."
The novice understood.
And thus said the master:
"It is the way of the Tao."
A user came to a master who had great status in lkml. The user asked the master: "Which is easier: implementing new features to the kernel or documenting them?"
"Implementing new features," replied the master.
The confused user then exclaimed:
"Surely it is easier to write a few sentences in the man page than it is to write pages of code without error?"
"Not so," said the master. "When coding, the Tao of Linux opens my eyes wide and allows me to see beyond the code, to let the source flow from my fingers, to implement without flaw. When documenting, however, all I have to work with is a C in high school English."
He who compiles from the stable tree is stubborn
and unwilling to change, but is guaranteed reliability.
He who compiles from the current tree is wise but perhaps too conformist, but is guaranteed steadiness.
He who compiles from the unstable tree is adventurous and is guaranteed new innovations: some good, some bad.
He who compiles straight from Bitkeeper is brave but guaranteed turbulence.
They are all of the Tao. One shall respect the old, and debug the new; none shall argue over which is greatest.
There once was a user who scripted in Perl: "Look at what I have to work with here," he said to a master of core, "My code is interpreted dynamically, the syntax is unique and simple, I have sockets, strings, arrays, and everything I could ever need. Why don't you stop meddling in C and come join me?"
The C programmer described his reasoning to the scripter: "Script is to C as ebonics is to Latin. If the scripter does not grow beyond that of which he scripts, he will surely [die]. Besides, without C, how can there be script?"
The scripter was enlightened, and the two became close friends.
It's time for you to leave.
Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Inigo Montoya: My name is Inigo Montoya, you put windows on my computer, prepare to die.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
Yeah. I've noticed that.
...I did get the story right, right?
I think he was trying to get on the hype-bandwagon surrounding "Linux" so he changed his name. Kinda like that RMS guy. He quit using his full name so that he would be known by a three-letter acronym just like "GNU."
And then RMS wanted to Torvalds to go by the name "RMS/Linus" to denote the fact that Stallman had been working in computer science for longer then Torvalds.
Maybe everyone would just be better off calling it "ATT/OS" to give credit back to where it really belongs.
Every time I read a ZiffDavis [eweek] article, I am amazed that they so blatantly put a pro-Micro$oft/Anti-Linux spin on it.
For example, a recent article says CERT issued 29 alerts, 16 of which were for Linux/Open Source apps, and only 9 for M$'s bloated crashing system. It doesn't say that most of the alerts for Linux were for local vulnerabilities except for OpenSSH and Apache, and that most of the M$ alerts were for remote exploits like scripting vulnerabilities in IIS, Outlook, IExplore...
Makes ya wonder.
Why isn't Sistina's LVM making it into the kernel? SUSE has been including it as standard in their distribution for some time.
I don't track the LKML at all. I'm curious why XFS made it in, but LVM did not.
Just remember, the first version of Windows NT was Windows NT 3.1 because they were pushing it as an upgrade from Windows 3.1. Therefore, it's really NT 3.1 and 3.0, so not that much ahead. :)
Alex
Does anyone know??
:)
BTW: For those of you that want to test the honesty of computer salesmen in the future, LRF stand for "little rubber feet"
HallmarkOrnaments.Com
If not, then he must be seriously pissed (or seriuosly naive) since they have two kids. Although, if she wanted to, his wife could easily fend him off. She is a six time Finnish karate champion.
It supports even now (2.4).
Will it support touchpads on laptops?
It supports.
Will the frame buffer work properly on 3dfx cards
Didn't saw any problem reports on lkml.
Will it get rid of the fucking cli for good and boot DIRECTLY in to X?
Are you insane?
Will it tell Stallman to fuck off for trying to put gnu/ on it.
GNU/Linux (The GNU Operating System with Linux kernel) is not Linux (the kernel).
and last but most importantly, will you be able to to swtich kernels with out rebooting (is it that hard?, why dosent the kernel just unload it self from memory and go back to the boot menu?)
You talk about Kexec? It's trying to be included in 2.5 right now.
:wq
if i remember correctly, linux was built to be PC unix. hmmm...so it still isn't ready to go on big iron. BFD. its strength is clustering, like at buffalo university. so just use the right tool for the job. though it does seem that the trend is toward distributed/clustered computing. which fits in perfectly with linux. how about instead of complaining that the kernel doesn't have this or that, get the source, and write your own LVM.
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
Well, the old LVM wasn't working at all in 2.5 kernel series at all - AFAIK the infrastructure all around gradually changed and noone stood up to keep LVM up to date. Thus, around the feature freeze there were three options - drop LVM, accept LVM2 or accept EVMS. It would be too bad to drop such a significant feature, and EVMS probably looked too complex to merge so lately or so.. it's not really clear to me, the decision was probably based on what Linus' lieutanants advised him, but at the end LVM2 ended up in the 2.5 series.
It's not the fall that kills you. It's the sudden stop at the end. -Douglas Adams
Nope, you're wrong. Linux version refers to the Kernel version. Redhat Version number refers to their distribution. Redhat is currently using Kernel 2.4.18. (See Here)
It is Redhat that is behind not Linus. Secondly, you wouldn't expect Redhat to release the latest kernel with their package because they need to be able to test and support it before they package it.
_______________________________
"I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
Yes. You will also need to upgrade your glibc.
-- I am not a fanatic, I am a true believer.
Will PCI modems support Linux? Will crappy hardware become better?
That is not a Linux issue. Neither cli nor X is a part of Linux. My distribution has been capable of booting directly into X for more than three years. But my computer has never done that, because I know how to use the command line. And to he who knows the command line it is the most powerfull user interface in existence.
He never requested GNU to be part of the name of Linux. He just requested that CDs containing 1% Linux and 60% GNU would at least have GNU in the name.
Work is being done in that area. I however don't know if kexec will make it for this version. I have previously been using kmonte, but it hasn't been developed since 2.2, and new kernels was changed in ways breaking kmonte for good.
Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
To all of those worried about LVM: 2.6 will include a LVM implementation. The EVMS won't make it though.
The story is that 2.4 included LVM1 (I am running it right now on my RH8 box) which had some restrictions and were generally regarded as a kludge. For the 2.6 kernel two competing replacements arised: LVM2 and EVMS. LVM2 is basicly a rewrite of LVM1 while EVMS is an entirely different beast aimed at the BIG IRON in the datacenters. After some (heated) discussion on LKML Linus decided to include LVM2 and scrap EVMS.
The reaction from the EVMS team (sponsered by IBM) was noble: They decided to remove their kernel-land code and rewrite their user-land utilities to use the winning LVM2 kernel interface and create a win-win situation for everyone. Kernel traffic covered the story here and Linux Weekly News made a mention of it here.
Distros ship customised kernels anyway, so they can put in LVM if they want.
I really wish it were possible to get the CryptoAPI merged into the full kernel. I've been compiling kernels without problems since the 1.2 series, but CryptoAPI patches are more convoluted than any other patch series I've ever tried.
Ah, to live in a sane world, with sane governments...
I know people laugh at the Hurd, and I have done too - but I am sure that if/when it comes out it will challenge Linux - certainly on the desktop. The reason is simple - no one, but no one, uses Linux on the desktop except hacker freaks like you and me. Just read Linus's comments - where is the commitment to make Linux a tool for the desktop - it just ain't there (and maybe it shouldn't be).
Will it tell Stallman to fuck off for trying to put gnu/ on it.
GNU/Linux (The GNU Operating System with Linux kernel) is not Linux (the kernel).
I'm still suprised that Stallman tried this. He of all people should know better. After all...
GNU's Not Linux
err... something like that...
Ascalante: Your bride is over 3,000 years old.
Kull: She told me she was 19!
I really wish it were possible to get the CryptoAPI merged into the full kernel. I've been compiling kernels without problems since the 1.2 series, but CryptoAPI patches are more convoluted than any other patch series I've ever tried.
/usr/src/linux; make menuconfig, etc. will bet you the Crypto API patch, as well as the low latency/preempt patches, grsecurity patches, and so on. All nicely applied already, and ready for you to compile and use.
Given that you're no stranger to either GNU/Linux or compiling the Linux kernel, you may want to take a look at the source-based Gentoo distribution. Aside from making download and compilation from the author's tarballs trivial via the portage system (emerge rsync ; emerge [packagename]), the gentoo-sources kernel has numerous additional patches, including the crypto-api patches.
emerge rsync ; emerge gentoo-sources, followed by the usual cd
Perhaps not as nice as if they'd made it into the feature freeze for 2.6, but a lot easier than the process you describe.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
And why should the Hurd be any better? Remember, it's just the kernel, like linux. GNU does the rest of the os for both systems. The desktop stuff is handled by *fill-in-your-favourite-X-session-manager* which will act the same and suck on both systems - sorry to say - I'm down to using sawfish without the gnome-session stuff and am seriously considering relaunching fvwm2... btw: any cool new lightweight window-managers out there?
While i am not usually one to complain about other people's posts, good lord - as soon as i saw this Linux 3.0 article i thought "uhoh more lame ass 3.1/3.11/95 jokes +3 funny..."
And unfortunately I was right. Am I the only one who finds the "In soviet russia" jokes to be orders of magnitiude funnier?
Jeremy
No. HTH. HAND. YIHBT.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
There are / have been three logical volume managers for Linux.
So everyone agreed that the original LVM1 code, while filling an important gap back in the day, was too ugly to live. Even its creators had abandoned it to twist in the wind when they wrote Device Mapper and the LVM2 corpus. Due to some invasive changes to the entire block device code in Linux 2.5.1 or so, the in-kernel LVM code was left broken, and nobody has been interested in fixing it. It was to be replaced by either EVMS or Device Mapper - or both. Linus left this decision to the last moment, about two days before the feature freeze, when he put in DM and left out EVMS.
EVMS is, as I said, the more feature-rich of the two, but most kernel hackers seemed not to like it very much, due to the aforementioned code duplication and its "all your block devices are belong to us" attitude. Probably, when the Oracle guy asked for LVM, he meant EVMS.
You use LVM1 today. When the 2.6 kernel comes out, you will have to upgrade to LVM2, and compile DM into your kernel, but it should be a smooth upgrade path - your on-disk volume group format will still be supported. Two problems you may face are:
You can preempt these problems by patching your 2.4 kernel with Sistina's DM patch, and migrate completely to LVM2/DM while still using 2.4. I'll probably do this the next time I have occasion to reboot, which may not be for awhile (my box has been up for 2.5 months - that's when I overloaded a circuit breaker...).
One last note. You may have heard of the well-publicised note where Kevin Corry announced that EVMS was changing direction. They will now reimplement what is currently a large kernel component of EVMS, moving it out of kernel space into user-space tools that will operate directly on top of Device Mapper (the LVM2 kernel bits). The hope is that DM will prove to be flexible enough that EVMS can continue to exist, with all its current features, purely in user-space - or possibly with a minimal amount of additional kernel code. So, if the Oracle people insist that EVMS is the way Enterprise Systems should run, they should still be satisfied. The EVMS team plans to have the new user-space-based EVMS out in a couple of months, well before 2.6 itself is widely adopted or, indeed, released.
"How can you claim that you are anti-crack, while still writing a window manager?" — Metacity README
Three Kids
Most of the data on your hard disk is just your local cache of software/data from 'the internet' - so you could treat your hard drive as mostly cache, with a small partition with your own/original data which you are hosting locally.
There would be many many problems to resolve before doing it (especially regarding security) - but the advantages would be that you'd effectivly have the latest versions of _all_ the worlds software available to you in your /usr or "Program Files" directory (though obviously you might not be able to use all of it without paying for licence keys)
In another post, someone else mentioned his name is actually "Indigo Montoya", only knowable by reading the book as his name is never said clearly in the movie and sounds like "Inigo".
Montoya: My name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die!
Montoya: My name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die!
Montoya: My name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die!
Guy With Six Fingers: STOP SAYING THAT!
Montoya: My name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die!
Montoya: My name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die!
Montoya: My name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die!
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
1. Make Beowolf cluster joke
2. Make Version number joke
3. ????
4. PROFIT!!
May as well overuse some other jokes too.
I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
Well, if they are using Linux, they are not browsing the web with it. Look at your apoache logs - how many Linux users are there out there?
Not many. About one-in-fifty don't use MSIE but that is not the same.