Slashdot Mirror


What Will Be in Linux 2.7?

Realistic_Dragon writes "The first discussion has been sighted on the Linux kernel mailing list to put together a feature list of things that should go into Linux 2.7 - including hotplug CPU & Ram support, network transparent sound and improvements to Netfilter to bring it up to the the level of OpenBSD's Packet Filter. And all this before most of us have started to run 2.6.0-preX, or even a 2.6 series stable release happening. Perhaps if you have a (sensible) idea now would be a good time to voice it, otherwise you will have to wait for 2.9 to get it included."

494 comments

  1. Good 64 bit support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    support the new AMD 64 bit processes and be optimized for them

    1. Re:Good 64 bit support by millahtime · · Score: 1

      How about optimized support for the 64 bit PowerPC. Not only are they in macs but IBM is going to be building servers with that chip.

    2. Re:Good 64 bit support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Good 64 bit support was added in what, Linux 1.2 or so. Digital (remember them?) borrowed Linus a few Alpha boxes for the purpose. One can still find the occasional kinks in less used applications, but the kernel has been working fine on 64-bit computers for a good while.

    3. Re:Good 64 bit support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Already done... I don't know how optimized it is versus what it could be... but mine runs very fast. ;)

      Suse and RH both have Opteron (AMD64) versions already.

    4. Re:Good 64 bit support by AdamHaun · · Score: 2, Informative

      2.6 already supports the Athlon-64, and GCC has architecture optimizations for it as well.

      How did this get modded up?

      --
      Visit the
    5. Re:Good 64 bit support by mandolin · · Score: 1
      I was also impressed with how ralf merged mips64 and mips into (practically) one arch for 2.6. It should be *much* easier to keep mips64 up-to-date.

      There is certainly room for even more improvement. As long as I'm wishing, I'd like to see all the architectures share more common code, netbsd-style.

      OTOH, at least the linux kernel doesn't still use the K&R coding style..

    6. Re:Good 64 bit support by Michael+Hunt · · Score: 1

      Yes, but is it supported as a NUMA architecture the same way the sequent stuff is? Or is it treated like an SMP?

      Does GCC have PROPER 64 bit support yet, or do we wind up with a situation like the ultrasparc where the kernel gets compiled with a specially hacked version of egcs, and the userland gets compiled as 32 bit?

    7. Re:Good 64 bit support by rweir · · Score: 1

      Linux was the first OS around to support AMD64. Even before it was called AMD64. WTF does "optimized for them" mean? GCC also supports it, and has 31337 CPU-specific optimisations for it, too.

      You'll note that you can buy RedHat AS for AMD 64 here, and Suse here.

      And for those following along at home: is he/she a troll or a moron?

  2. The better question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What WON'T be in Linux 2.7?

    1. Re:The better question... by Nick+Driver · · Score: 3, Funny

      What WON'T be in Linux 2.7?

      Uhh, you mean like any SCO code?

    2. Re:The better question... by TheCrazyFinn · · Score: 1

      Win32 Support

      --
      "You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
    3. Re:The better question... by Aardpig · · Score: 1

      What WON'T be in Linux 2.7?

      Autorun. Can't let any DRM measures creep in, can we?

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    4. Re:The better question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That won't stop SCO from claiming their is.

  3. DRM support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    so we can play all our favorite programs and games.

    1. Re:DRM support by ultrabot · · Score: 1

      so we can play all our favorite programs and games.

      Not to mention music and movies.

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    2. Re:DRM support by Carnildo · · Score: 1

      Forget supporting DRM -- it needs support for bypassing DRM!

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    3. Re:DRM support by cK-Gunslinger · · Score: 4, Funny

      Bah, let's just go ahead and put Half-Life 2 in the kernel. It shouldn't be too hard now that the source is available. =)

    4. Re:DRM support by sharkey · · Score: 1
      so we can play all our favorite programs and games.

      You mean Autorun, right?

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    5. Re:DRM support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I already have two shift keys.

  4. Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Tyrdium · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Ummmm... Wouldn't you fry the motherboard by swapping a CPU when the computer's on?

    1. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by bombadillo · · Score: 2, Informative

      " Ummmm... Wouldn't you fry the motherboard by swapping a CPU when the computer's on?" Think Enterprise environment and Big Iron, not desktop machines.

    2. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Feztaa · · Score: 4, Informative

      I believe they're referring to some mainframes, in which there are bays of CPUs/RAM that can be swapped in and out while the system is running.

      CPU hotplug support is not designed for removing the processor from your single-CPU x86 box.

    3. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by spyder913 · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is hardware that supports this for higher end servers. (With multiprocessor, AFAIK). Just another way to reduce downtime.

    4. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Wouldn't you fry the motherboard by swapping a CPU when the computer's on?
      Typical PC hardware, yes. Enterprise hardware, no.
    5. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by RadioheadKid · · Score: 4, Funny

      Nope, you just have to do it REALLY fast...

      And don't forget to lick all the Cheetos orange dust off your fingers before you start.

      --
      "Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos." -Homer Simpson
    6. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by elvum · · Score: 1

      That would be hotplug cpu support for motherboards that feature hotplug cpu support. Consumer boards generally don't.

    7. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      It reall shouldn't be that difficult to add thia feature. Most of the work has already been written, and adding it to Linux should require no more than simple cut n paste job.

    8. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Nope, you just have to do it REALLY fast...
      Yeah, right in between clock cycles. Tick, tick, pull switch insert, tick, tick..
    9. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by cyb97 · · Score: 1

      (With multiprocessor, AFAIK)
      Hope so, otherwise, what would run the kernel while swapping ?

    10. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by keester · · Score: 1

      Scottie: Captain, she's giving you all she's got. Kirk: Scottie, swap out the CPU and add more RAM.

      --
      Take it easy? I'll take it anyway I can get it . . .
    11. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Chromal · · Score: 1

      Heh. Reasonable question, but whoever modded you Insightful is nuts. There is hardware that support modular CPU and memory hot-swapping / installation. Just the thing for modularity and upgrading in situations where downtime is not an option.

      For an example, scope this.

    12. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Thud457 · · Score: 4, Funny
      "CPU hotplug support is not designed for removing the processor from your single-CPU x86 box."

      I can't wait to see the kiddies show off that feature! "The new kernel has CPU hotplug support, here, watch... oh CRAP."

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    13. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by bicho · · Score: 1

      Its the first time I hear about that.
      Does it have a back-up CPU? else, between unplug and plug, where is the OS running, or how does it resumes?

      --

      errera hunamum ets
    14. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by donutz · · Score: 1

      I believe they're referring to some mainframes, in which there are bays of CPUs/RAM that can be swapped in and out while the system is running.

      CPU hotplug support is not designed for removing the processor from your single-CPU x86 box.


      Ok, now why is a "well duh!" comment being rated as "Informative"? Hello?! If anything, rate it what it is...Funny...especially when you picture some moron configuring his kernel for CPU hotplug support, then poppin' that thing out of its socket while the system is cranking away with Seti@Home...

    15. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      It helps if you hit the "TURBO" button first, so you only have to do it MOSTLY REALLY FAST.

    16. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are these really neat machines that have multiple CPUs. You may have heard of them. They use fancy names like "SMP" and "NUMA". The ones that support hotplug are often called "mainframes." Companies like "IBM", "SGI" and "Sun" are among those that produce these high-end beasts. They sometimes call this "enterprise computing."

    17. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As he said, it only exists in systems with more than one CPU.

    18. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by DA-MAN · · Score: 1

      Why would anyone need to change out the cpu of a foundry switch? I mean how often do switch cpu's actually die?

      --
      Can I get an eye poke?
      Dog House Forum
    19. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 1
      May be not for desktop use.

      But for machines that need to be up all the time 24x7 for years, this is very critical. I have worked with Tandem Mainframes, In the entire 2-3 years I was working with them, NOT once were they rebooted, and I remember atleast 2-3 CPU hot swaps.

      Adding hot swapping capabilitites to linux kernel is a big step towards taking linux to the really big enterprise tasks.

      --
      for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
    20. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by DA-MAN · · Score: 1

      > " Ummmm... Wouldn't you fry the motherboard by swapping a CPU when the computer's on?" Think Enterprise environment and Big Iron, not desktop machines.

      Yeah but my comment was more regarding the use of Big Iron. The only Big Iron I ever heard of is this and I do not believe for one minute that Linux is the operating system on foundry switches. Yet again my question is why would someone need to switch out a processor on a switch without powering it off?

      --
      Can I get an eye poke?
      Dog House Forum
    21. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Nutria · · Score: 1

      SGI & Sun do not make mainframes!!!! Never have and never will.

      Still, Big Systems (including mainframes, newer big "minicomputers" and the aforementioned Tandems) have support for hot-swappable RAM, CPUs & controller cards (mainframes don't have PCI slots).

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    22. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by valdis · · Score: 1

      Foundry has a specific product called that.

      'big iron' has been a generic term for large enterprise-class systems ever since the DEC-10/20 and IBM S/360 processors 20-30 years ago. These days, it refers to boxes like IBM z-Series and Sun E15K boxes.

    23. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by DA-MAN · · Score: 1

      Alright man, Thanks.

      This is the answer I've been looking for. I mean I picked up on it through context, but I was never entirely sure that was what was meant.

      --
      Can I get an eye poke?
      Dog House Forum
    24. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Nodatadj · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't you fry your fingers too?

    25. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A troll by any other name smells as sweet

      JOKE

    26. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      youve obviously never seen one. they really earn that name!

    27. Re:Hotplug CPU and RAM support? by BenZoate · · Score: 1

      Mom, Dad, I let the magic black smoke out of the computer............

  5. How about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Support for those *#!& broadcom wireless cards?

    (I know, I know... complain to broadcom about it. But it's still one of the major unsolved problems for linux.)

  6. Free Inside Linux 2.7 ! Get yours today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Free inside every box of Linux 2.7: a frivolous lawsuit by SCO! Brought to you by the same sort of crooked attorneys who sued McDonalds because someone spilled hot coffee on themself.

  7. Remove Request by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 3, Funny

    Remove SCO from all future distributions. :^)

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:Remove Request by redog · · Score: 1

      Good idea, but how do you code that in?
      The only way I could think is to specificaly target their external ip addresses and code errors in.
      Or mabe by domain name? Like If I name my host ibm.sco.com it kernel panics.

      Is that violating the GPL?

    2. Re:Remove Request by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Nah, just make all 2.7.x kernels ping SCO once in a while... Say a couple of times a minute. Oh, and add this feature to = 2.6.x...

    3. Re:Remove Request by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      > Remove SCO from all future distributions. :^)

      Unfortunately that would require putting SCO in first, which might give their case merit. I'm not sure we can afford that.

    4. Re:Remove Request by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1
      Is that violating the GPL?

      Not if you don't distribute the code afterwards.

      --
      "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  8. Multiple-kernel support by Marx_Mrvelous · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe we should start working on a way to re-load the kernel without rebooting. I don't know if it's practically possible, but it certainly would be neat!

    --

    Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
    1. Re:Multiple-kernel support by crow · · Score: 1

      Yes, it is possible, but I doubt it is something that we'll see in Linux anytime soon. In order to do an online kernel upgrade, you have to keep track of all the changes in the kernel's data structures. If you make a point of defining them such that they don't change between kernels (much like you define static APIs), then that's not too painful. But doing that is a lot of work, and it impacts every area of the kernel. So it's a ton of work without a huge benefit.

      Besides, it is counter to the Linux kernel philosophy of not worrying about compatibility when you can instead have a better implementation. (That's one reason third-party binary-only drivers often break.)

      And what's the point? The general strategy for highly-available services is redundant servers. If you need to upgrade your kernel, just do it on one system at a time so the cluster as a whole doesn't have any downtime.

      But it would be cool...

    2. Re:Multiple-kernel support by Erwos · · Score: 1

      Two-kernel-monte (info here) will let you do that.

      The problem is that it's unlikely you'd be able to do very much when this was going on anyways. Rebooting is probably not all that much worse a solution.

      Still a nifty trick, though.

      -Erwos

      --
      Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    3. Re:Multiple-kernel support by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 1

      Try searching for kexec.

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    4. Re:Multiple-kernel support by MBCook · · Score: 1
      Yes! kexec is my killer feature that I'd love to see get included.

      Google search
      Kernel Traffic

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    5. Re:Multiple-kernel support by martok · · Score: 1

      Wasn't the kexec work supposed to handle this issue.

      The one area where kernel chaining would be useful is when upgrading a remote system. I work on some colocated servers where the building is rather inaccessible especially on weekends. We have a remote method of power cycling the machine however. If a kernel upgrade goes wrong for some reason. Kernel bug, missing modules etc, we have to go into the colo to boot the backup kernel from the bootloader. A kernel chaining system would allow for the testing of a kernel before inserting it as default into the bootloader. If something went wrong, power-cycle and you have your old kernel again.

    6. Re:Multiple-kernel support by crow · · Score: 2, Informative

      What you need is a smarter boot loader. What if grub had the option to use a fallback kernel if it is invoked more than once in a one-hour period? What if you could tell grub to use a non-default kernel on the next boot only? Or some other option along those lines?

      Then you could boot your test kernel remotely, and if it failed, you could power-cycle and be back to your safe kernel.

      Another way of acomplishing this would be to implement loadlin for Linux to load your test kernel. (loadlin was a DOS program that would boot Linux on a multi-boot system used back in the days when many people used a UMSDOS file system.)

    7. Re:Multiple-kernel support by AxelTorvalds · · Score: 1
      Kexec rocks, I've used it in embedded products.

      There hasn't been a huge buyoff on it from the kernel community but it looks like 2.7 may include it, the API is now called fastboot.

    8. Re:Multiple-kernel support by bzzzt · · Score: 1

      Ask the colo to hook up a serial port of the machine to a terminal server and setup grub/whatever to use a serial console...

    9. Re:Multiple-kernel support by nocomment · · Score: 1

      OpenBSD has a neat feature for this that should be mimicked.

      http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq11.html

      --
      /* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
      /* http://allyourbasearebelongto.us */
    10. Re:Multiple-kernel support by alannon · · Score: 1

      You can do this currently. I do this currently, as I remotely administer a Rackshack server. I don't know how you'd do it with grub, but with lilo, just use the -R command line option.
      It makes the lilo configuration change only for the next reboot. At next reboot, you're back to the original configuration.

      Rackshack only offers RedHat, but I wanted a Debian server. So I resized the primary RedHat partition, installed Debian in the extra space, then set things up with lilo so that it would boot into RedHat by default, unless I used the -R command line option.

      This allows me to do whatever I'd like with Debian, including upgrading kernels, but not be in danger of getting into trouble since by ordering a reboot it will go back to the factory-installed RedHat configuration.

      It was a lot of trouble to set up in the first place, but it's worked wonderfully for about 2 years now.

    11. Re:Multiple-kernel support by FreakinHippie · · Score: 1

      Try the GNU/Hurd

    12. Re:Multiple-kernel support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could do that now with `lilo -R test-kernel && reboot'. If it fails you're back to lilo's default on the next power cycle.

  9. Umm, one guess: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SCO code! Ha ha. J/K.

  10. Erm..Userfriendly UI? by FileNotFound · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How about a userfriendly UI that'd let me configure everything without having to recompile eveything (or do it invisibly) just so that I can play and use without the pain and suffering that is require nowdays.

    My main gripe with Linux has been that it's a bitch to configure for things that should't be so hard. Trying to get powermanagment to work on my IBM took me months and never worked right.

    --
    In Soviet Russia, the television watches YOU!
    1. Re:Erm..Userfriendly UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      modprobe apm

      How difficult was that?

      Seriously though - the days of needing to recompile everything are long gone. Even ACPI support is there in the current set of distros (it only took around five minutes to get it set up on Mandrake 9.1 - and that includes the time spent searching on Google for a howto).

    2. Re:Erm..Userfriendly UI? by Dr.+Zowie · · Score: 4, Informative

      User friendly configuration has been done.

      I'd settle for power management working right.

    3. Re:Erm..Userfriendly UI? by antiMStroll · · Score: 1

      Linux=kernel. Distro!= kernel. Configuration UI's are third party apps.

    4. Re:Erm..Userfriendly UI? by sharkey · · Score: 1
      How about a userfriendly UI

      Yeah, the "Start" button could be Dust Puppy, and when an app coredumps, Crud Puppy will pop up and smear grease on the inside of your screen.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    5. Re:Erm..Userfriendly UI? by gnalle · · Score: 1

      It would be nice to have a search feature in xconfig. As a start they could restrict the searches to module names.

    6. Re:Erm..Userfriendly UI? by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      How about a userfriendly UI...

      This is a shortcoming of Linux-based operating systems, but the responsibility for improving it would have to fall upon the distro and desktop environment maintainers, not on the kernel developers.

      In a well-designed OS (and Linux ain't too shabby in that dept.), the kernel should be almost totally independent of the GUI and vice versa.

    7. Re:Erm..Userfriendly UI? by jorleif · · Score: 1

      In a well-designed OS, the kernel should be almost totally independent of the GUI and vice versa.

      Why? You are assuming some kind of general multi-use operating system then. If the device is used for heavily graphical tasks and hardly any number crunching, then it pays to design the kernel for use with the graphical environment. A server on the other hand might benefit from throughput enhancing features that might impair interactive graphical performance. Either way the kernel is hardly independent from the GUI.

    8. Re:Erm..Userfriendly UI? by hitmark · · Score: 1

      hmm, (gets working on a gui setup), E should do nicely for so a graphic heavy UI...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    9. Re:Erm..Userfriendly UI? by red+floyd · · Score: 1

      I want ESR's adventure game kernel configuration program!

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    10. Re:Erm..Userfriendly UI? by Rasta+Prefect · · Score: 1
      You are assuming some kind of general multi-use operating system then. If the device is used for heavily graphical tasks and hardly any number crunching, then it pays to design the kernel for use with the graphical environment. A server on the other hand might benefit from throughput enhancing features that might impair interactive graphical performance. Either way the kernel is hardly independent from the GUI.

      Lots of hypotheticals "Well there might be some unspecified feature that would be good for graphical performance that would trash the server performance and vice versa..." Name one. The only OS I can think of off hand that integrates the GUI with the kernel in any siginficant way comes from Microsoft. (I'm not sure about MacOS previous to X). Really, aside from putting drivers for the devices in the kernel, in what way is the GUI dependent? The only issue I can even think of is responsiveness - Preemptible kernel, timeslices and such, but this is hardly a GUI specific issue. Even SGI who was king of Graphics for years always used X, which is about as far from kernel/Gui integration as you can get.

      --
      Why?
    11. Re:Erm..Userfriendly UI? by aliquis · · Score: 1

      sysctl?

    12. Re:Erm..Userfriendly UI? by Uerige · · Score: 1

      Have you heard of modprobe? In most modern distros, next to everything is included or installable as a module. So just say 'modprobe driverx' instead of recompiling the kernel if you don't know how.

  11. My wish list by WTFmonkey · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    • Flying cars
    • Frickin sharks with frickin laser beams
    • A moon colony
    • Jetpacks
    • The San Diego Padres win the World Series
    • The San Diego Chargers win the Superbowl
    • An end to the odd behavior of /. lately (why won't the damn thing submit already!?!?!!)
    I think that about covers it.
    1. Re:My wish list by FileNotFound · · Score: 1

      You forgot about Duke Nukem Forever

      --
      In Soviet Russia, the television watches YOU!
    2. Re:My wish list by Quixadhal · · Score: 1, Funny
      • Blackjack
      • Hookers
      On second thought, skip the blackjack.

    3. Re:My wish list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aw, just forget the whole thing. :)

    4. Re:My wish list by ebbomega · · Score: 1

      Well... uh.... uh.... you can make make coffee from halfway across the world......

      --
      Karma: Non-Heinous
  12. Most important of all by Eric+Ass+Raymond · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Usability, perhaps?

  13. What Linux Needs by like_broken_records · · Score: 5, Funny

    What Linux needs is some fatal errors. How about a screen of one solid color that comes on to warn you that all your work for the past hour is gone. You have to remember that Linux is competing with windows. If you can't beat them Join them. p.

    1. Re: What Linux Needs by Mr+Smidge · · Score: 1

      Parent moderated as Insightful? Yes, that's some good moderation..

      But back on topic, to make everything closer to Windows, you might want to introduce some new features that make X crash randomly on some hardware. Oh hang on..

    2. Re:What Linux Needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This wasn't a particularly funny joke when I first heard it all those years ago and it is even less funny now - who the hell does the moderating around here?

    3. Re:What Linux Needs by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      What Linux needs is some fatal errors. How about a screen of one solid color that comes on to warn you that all your work for the past hour is gone.

      I've installed a new kernel patch called vloopback that fixes this issue. Now I can kernel panic on demand. It's really nifty. Just insert vloopback module and then remove it! Voila, kernel panic! Thankfully Windows isn't that buggy so I can use my Quickcam on there without a problem.

  14. Hotplug CPU & RAM support by DrFlex · · Score: 0

    ???
    So this means that... Say I'm compiling Half-Life... and I find out more RAM would be helpful... I just hotplug 256Mb in and voila! the compiler will go on and allocate the RAM I just plugged in?!?

    1. Re:Hotplug CPU & RAM support by yerricde · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you're compiling a large program, your motherboard and OS support hot-swap, and you add more RAM, then yes, the next GCC process to execute will see the extra RAM.

      Removing RAM, on the other hand, would probably need a hardware switch on the motherboard that swaps everything in that bank to disk.

      --
      Will I retire or break 10K?
  15. Idea by borgdows · · Score: 1

    A totally new XFree... or should I say Xouvert integrated into the kernel!

    1. Re:Idea by ultrabot · · Score: 1

      A totally new XFree... or should I say Xouvert integrated into the kernel!

      Throw in Apache, Postgresql and Tuxracer also!

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    2. Re:Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And dont forget nethack or tome!!

  16. What I'd like to see... by ikewillis · · Score: 4, Interesting

    is a scheduler on the same caliber as Solaris, so that the kernel can utilize multiple schedulers simultaneously. Linux currently ships with only a timeshare scheduler, but Solaris supports a number of different schedulers which can all operate simultaneously. Administrators can also move processes between different schedulers on the fly as well. A Fair Share Scheduler, for example, would be nice so that resources on large systems can be partitioned effectively as to prevent certain processes from monopolizing system resources. The CPU/RAM hotplug support would be nice... glad to see Linux trying to catch up to where Solaris was years ago. Just kidding :)

    1. Re:What I'd like to see... by paulbd · · Score: 4, Informative

      linux doesn't only ship with a timeshare scheduler. it includes both the SCHED_FIFO and SCHED_RR schedulers, which provide close-to-real-time scheduling capabilities. most pro apps in the audio realm use one or both of these. they can both be used alongside the SCHED_OTHER ("timeshare") scheduler.

      what would be more interesting would be CPU cycle reservation, which is already present in OS X, and would be very useful for any streaming media software.

    2. Re:What I'd like to see... by photon317 · · Score: 3, Interesting


      Oh please. No doubt having had a different focus and so many years of time advantage, there are key areas where Solaris still trumps Linux. For instance, multiprocessor scalability (although it seems they sacrificed performance on 1-2 cpu boxes to acheive this result for their 64+ cpu boxes).

      However, don't ever claim that Sun's kernel is in general superior to Linux. In a lot of ways Sun's kernel is ancient and crappy compared to Linux. Take a look at Sun's IP stack versus Linux's, for instance. Or how about lvm+softraid? When will Solaris stop relying on Veritas? (and don't answer diskuite, please). Or how about good integrated netfilter-like code?

      While we're on it, let's talk hardware. The price /performance ratios on UltraSparcs make Xeons look like a super bargain, not to mention Athlons. It's way past late for them to have closed up the Sparc shop and moved everything over to this cheaper commodity platform that can pump more mips or flops per dollar than Sun can. And how freaking long did it take them to adopt PCI? At one point in the past 64-bit 25Mhz SBus was acceptable.... but how long did they have to delay deploying PCI on their high end systems before finally giving in?? It was nuts, and they've finally owned up and gone pretty much solid PCI-only now. Of course, now most of my Suns have 64/66 PCI busses, while my latest Intels are doing PCI-X...

      --
      11*43+456^2
    3. Re:What I'd like to see... by ikewillis · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "However, don't ever claim that Sun's kernel is in general superior to Linux. In a lot of ways Sun's kernel is ancient and crappy compared to Linux."

      I believe the word you're looking for is mature, and immature on the Linux side. Take Linux's VM implementation, which has been scrapped and rewritten from scratch multiple times within 2.4 alone. Meanwhile the Solaris VM has been fine tuned over the past decade. Solaris's time share scheduler has been O(1) for well over half a decade, whereas Linux is just now getting an O(1) time share scheduler.

      "Take a look at Sun's IP stack versus Linux's, for instance."

      Care to tell me how Linux is superior? You seem to be only assuming it is, and leaving the burden of proof upon me. Sorry, I put it back on you.

      But just for review of some networking features: Solaris has offered stateful I/O multiplexing through the /dev/poll mechanism as well as asynchronous I/O for years. These features are only now being implemented in Linux with things like epoll(), which you'll need a 2.6 kernel and userland support in glibc to use. It will be at least a year before we can begin to expect the average Linux system to support stateful I/O multiplexing through epoll().

      Or how about lvm+softraid? When will Solaris stop relying on Veritas? (and don't answer diskuite, please).

      Don't answer Solstice Disk Suite? Perhaps you forget that the LVM was modeled after the Sun Volume Manager (which later became SDS) Perhaps you'd have an argument if you were championing FreeBSD's vinum, which was modeled after the Veritas Volume Manager, however you're trying to champion a technology which mimics the Solaris implementation yet saying to discount that very implementation. Pathetic...

      "Or how about good integrated netfilter-like code?"

      Sorry, people aren't going to be using their $20,000 systems as routers for their cable modems.

      "While we're on it, let's talk hardware. The price /performance ratios on UltraSparcs make Xeons look like a super bargain, not to mention Athlons.

      Please show me a system with better price/performance than the V440: http://store.sun.com/catalog/doc/BrowsePage.jhtml? cid=104994&parentId=48589

      Keep in mind that no one in their right mind is going to shell out $26,000 for a system without a warranty. The V440 comes with 3 years of parts and on-site labor.

      I'd certainly like to see you configure an equivalent system (the 1.28GHz UltraSPARC IIIi is equivalent to a 1.8GHz Opteron) from a vendor that offers at least a year of parts and on-site labor.

      "It's way past late for them to have closed up the Sparc shop and moved everything over to this cheaper commodity platform that can pump more mips or flops per dollar than Sun can. And how freaking long did it take them to adopt PCI?"

      The earliest Sparc systems I know of supporting PCI were Ultra 5s, released in 1995, about the same time most PC systems were starting to feature PCI.

      "Of course, now most of my Suns have 64/66 PCI busses, while my latest Intels are doing PCI-X..."

      Unless you're talking about the Opteron, the scalability and throughput of x86 systems is severely limited by the interconnect used between CPUs. P4 Xeons essentially share the FSB between processors, greatly limiting the amount of bus bandwidth that can be simultaneously utilized by multiple processors. With the P4, keep in mind also that the P4 does not cache operations, only micro-ops in its trace cache, so whenever the trace cache becomes tainted (by, say, mispredicing a branch) the P4 must fall back on retrieving the original opcodes out of main memory, saturating the front side bus (this is why Intel has been aggressively stepping up the bus speed of the P4)

      For use as a high performance server, Linux does not rival Solaris in

    4. Re:What I'd like to see... by cybrthng · · Score: 3, Informative

      You have to be kidding right? Dump Veritas? What are you smoking? Veritas isn't just a Volume Manager/Disksuite it is a supported/planned and critical piece of your infrastructure! You rely on Veritas because you know it is tried, true and recoverable. The excellent relation of Sun and Veritas is a reason to use the platform just like Veritas on HPUX and other platforms. Your not just paying for the software, your paying for the support and paying for the mission critical needs that demand that solution. Veritas is an EXCELLENT package and nothing in linux comes close to the Veritas & Sun solutions on certified hardware. (And if you compare the linux solutions on linux certified systems with the same performance, manageability and support you get from sun i would like to see ONE vendor that can compare!)

      I also don't believe you understand the usefullness of Sun (non linux)solutions. You keep on correlating the costs to acquisition. In the real world the hardware/software costs don't mean squat. Any large IT business knows that your biggest cost is employees, software, licensing, support and contractors.

      For one, i can spend 32,000 on a 4 way 64 bit cpu machine with 8 gigs of memory, 500gb diskspace and have Hotswappable CPU's, a VASTLY supperior backplane, Vastly superior scalability in growth and a proven reliable architecture. You Can't buy ANY linux solution/Wintel solution that comes close to the Solaris/RS6000/HPUX based systems out there. As i've stated before there is only ONE vendor that offers a machine feature comparison to suns LOW END/MID RANGE v880's and it doesn't come close in comparison to power. For example the only linux enabled hot swappable cpu/backplane/intel solution is built on 4 700 mhz pentium 3 processors and costs 24,000 for the base system. My Quad 1.2ghz v880 out of the box doesn't require anything proprietary, but on the linux solution you have to run the vendors version of linux, the vendors version of the apps compiled and can only use the vendors approved addons. Sure sun is only one vendor, but solaris is solaris. There isn't a mix match of versions, releases or there isn't a version of solaris for my v880 that doesn't work on my e10k. I can grow with a common platform to support from 1 user to 65000+ users and even cluster to support from that point on.

      You have to get your mindset away from free/cheap = better. You have to realize that in the business world the costs for platforms that are tried and true is expected and also minimal compared to the costs to keep it running.

      I would rather run my 2 terrabyte financial application on a slower sun server because of the reliability, the proven architecture and HA features. You have to remember that in my case 5 minutes of downtime costs $137,000. Suddenly a $3,000 Veritas volume management solution and a $100,000 hardware platform not only is justifyable but almost even insufficient in itself if you break out the cost vs requirements ratio.

      I can make my 3 Terrabyte Clarrion System, my Sun V880 Systems, my Sun 280/240r webservers and my solaris management workstations run for months at a time in pure harmony. The fact that NOTHING CHANGES ON A WHIM IS A GODSEND!! The stability, and slowness by which things change is the reason why businesses rely on such as the costs are far from just your hardware/os purchase price.

    5. Re:What I'd like to see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in the Linux 2.7 Kernel is Windows. Then, maybe some fairly new hardware will work.

    6. Re:What I'd like to see... by pez · · Score: 1

      > Please show me a system with better price/performance than the V440:

      Is this a joke? You can (and we do) easily buy five Intel dual-processor 3Mhz, 2GB RAM machines for $25K -- with three year support contracts (hint: www.dell.com). Are you actually saying that this single box will outperform those five Intel servers? Now of course CPU Mhz doesn't tell the whole story (doesn't come close) but in almost all other regards (RAM excluded) the systems are similar, and you get *five* of them.

    7. Re:What I'd like to see... by ikewillis · · Score: 1
      Is this a joke? You can (and we do) easily buy five Intel dual-processor 3Mhz, 2GB RAM machines for $25K -- with three year support contracts (hint: www.dell.com). Are you actually saying that this single box will outperform those five Intel servers?

      If the task is easily parallelized, such as a modelling program or other scientific computing tasks, or if the systems are serving as web or application servers for a web site, then yes, by all means buy x86.

      However, for the backend database the only purpose of more machines is redundancy. Operations which modify the database will see negligable performance increases from one system alone due to the high cost of replication. Furthermore, keep in mind the increased level of optimization of DBMS like Oracle 9i on Solaris/SPARC vs. Oracle 9i on Linux/IA32 (Oracle 9i for Linux/AMD64 is still only a developer preview) So yes, when I talk price/performance of the V440 I am talking for a single system...

      I configured a Dell PowerEdge 6600 with 4 * 2.0GHz Xeons, 16GB RAM (16X1GB, the cheapest option) and 4 * Ultra320 36GB drives, and included Red Hat Advanced Server (~$500). The total system cost was over $30,000. But feel free to try to get the cost of a single system comparable to the V440 under $26,000.

      Sorry, Dell is the wrong answer!

    8. Re:What I'd like to see... by AaronW · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is actually present in TimeSys Linux, which is a very cool feature, BTW. It lets you guarantee a certain amount of CPU resources and latency.

      -Aaron

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    9. Re:What I'd like to see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      erm.. sorry pal... but solaris doesn't depend on veritas..

      have you looked at solaris volume manager?

      on default install on solaris 9...
      doing all kinds of software raids with hot spares.. and all that crap is plain easy....

      solaris is slow, I don't know much about solaris internals..

      but solaris scheduler seems to profile very well the type of tasks running and distributing the right priorities to each of them..

      having a sun machine with load of 100.? and being able to ssh, and edit files there with "just a little" of lag.. is amazing .. of course that running a gcc takes ages :) (this was in a university machine, with 6000users and 133 lisps running (AI projects..))

      this was in 2001, and I doubt that linux can handle so well these kinds of loads...today

      but all round... solaris seems slower than linux.. at least in common 2/4/8 smp machines...
      Just don't know how the support of linux in things like multipathing, and disk I/O is compaired to Solaris...
      It looks like we (linux) need better performance metrics.. things like iostat, mpstat, vmstat .. to understand better the response to different kinds of loads... pinpoint bottlenecks..etc..

      and of course.. something like in kernel resource manager/limiter/restrictions .. like solaris resource manager .. would be nice.
      things like syscall logging is also nice...

      I'm just thinking in what I would miss If I had to change to linus for big shell provider/general porpuse unix machines.. like in my university :) .. about sun hardware.. thats got nothing to do with the OS/kernel performance.. and we all know that Sun CPUs are crappy :D

    10. Re:What I'd like to see... by DA-MAN · · Score: 1

      hmm..

      I didn't know Intel ever made a processor slower than 4.77 MHz, especially not a 3 MHz processor that can support SMP and 2 GB of ram.

      For $25K, I'm sure you could get much faster Intels or Athlons, although I must admit I haven't checked the prices recently.

      --
      Can I get an eye poke?
      Dog House Forum
    11. Re:What I'd like to see... by Sircus · · Score: 1

      ...and 10 minutes on Dell's website just got me a price for a PowerEdge 6600 with quad 2.0GHz/1Mb cache Xeons, with 3 year's parts+labour, 4x36Gb U320 drives, 16Gb of RAM and dual power supply. For $22321. Which, as I make it, is $3.5k cheaper than Sun. Depending on the app, I figure 2.0GHz Xeons are probably going to be equivalent to 1.28GHz Ultrasparc3s...

      --
      PenguiNet: the (shareware) Windows SSH client
    12. Re:What I'd like to see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      10 minutes on Dell's website just got me a price for a PowerEdge 6600 with quad 2.0GHz/1Mb cache Xeons, with 3 year's parts+labour, 4x36Gb U320 drives, 16Gb of RAM

      That 16 GB of ram sounds great in an Intel box... right up until you try to create a 4.000000001 GB process. It is at that point that the difference starts to become clear, if it isn't already.

    13. Re:What I'd like to see... by stevesliva · · Score: 1
      You have to get your mindset away from free/cheap = better. You have to realize that in the business world the costs for platforms that are tried and true is expected and also minimal compared to the costs to keep it running.
      Google agrees, but I'm pretty sure their solution is far different than "Buy Big Iron."
      --
      Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
    14. Re:What I'd like to see... by autocracy · · Score: 1

      Seriously... I want to know where you work that 5 minutes of downtime == $137,000... the ROI on that is insane!

      --
      SIG: HUP
    15. Re:What I'd like to see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats nothing special in finance, banking or airline reservations systems.

      There were systems that cost $1,000,000/hr in lost business long ago.

    16. Re:What I'd like to see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are plenty of business problems for which clusters aren't a workable solution no matter how big they are. Sometimes you just need the big iron and the special attributes that they bring into the picture, like massive IO. (See previous /. discussions on mainframes/dinosaurs.)

    17. Re:What I'd like to see... by Ozric · · Score: 1

      I would not trade VxVM,VxFS,CFS or VCS for anything. I like LVM on HPUX, but after lots of time with VxVM I would never go back. Indeed, I would hope Veritas is working on getting their tools ported to Linux as If I could put some Linux in. I would demand it.

    18. Re:What I'd like to see... by shibashaba · · Score: 1

      HP had some software that you would let you pick different schedulers as kernel modules and change them on the fly. I've never used it though.

      --
      ---------- Open Source is capitalism applied to IP.
    19. Re:What I'd like to see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      glad to see Linux trying to catch up to where Solaris was years ago.

      Gosh, I hope not.

      B/c in a few years I don't think linux will be anything close to a dead OS, but for Solaris the writing is already on the wall. For all machines up to 4 processors, linux absolutely kills Solaris every which way but loose in price/performance comparisons.

      To be certain, numa support in linux is just coming up, as are a host of other "enterprise" features used by 0.000001% of the servers out there. But, IBM is doing the heavy lifting, so what the hey. It'll come, and then Solaris will have nothing to show. Nada.

    20. Re:What I'd like to see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Please show me a system with better price/performance than the V440...

      Interestingly, you can go to penguincomputing.com and configure an Altus 4200 server to essentially the exact specs of the V440 (Quad Opteron 844 [1.8GHz], 4x36GB SCSI, 16GB RAM, 2 Gigabit Ethernet ports, 3-year on-site warranty, etc.), and the Linux box ends up with a price that's just a tad lower than the Sun.

      Technically, you must confess, I win :-)

    21. Re:What I'd like to see... by pipacs · · Score: 1

      Check out HP's PRM.

    22. Re:What I'd like to see... by larien · · Score: 1

      Ultra 5 FCS date was December 1997 according to this.

  17. I, for one, ... by Leffe · · Score: 1

    ... welcome a new kernel with UMSDOS support.

    I hate my computer(s). One of them is fragmented beyond hell(beneath?), pretty impossible to repartition, and the other one is running WinXP with NTFS, oh, and I haven't got the WinXP install discs as it was already installed on the computer, COMPAQ...

    I feel like buying a new harddisk... but I'd have to buy 2 then, one for stuff stolen from RIAA/MPAA and one for Linux...

    1. Re:I, for one, ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good grief.

      Buy a Mac and sleep better.

  18. BSP/IP support! by Tumbleweed · · Score: 4, Funny

    BSP/IP - "Bitch Slap Protocol/Internet Protocol" support - for remotely Bitch Slapping stupid users. An idea whose time has come(tm).

    Oh yeah, and add more SCO(tm) code - adding Evil(tm) to MS Windows(tm) sure didn't hurt the bottomline at MS(tm)! :)

    Disclaimer: (tm), (r), and (c) wherever appropriate...

    Note: BSP/IP is defensively patented by FlyByNite Industries, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Harkonnen Enterprises.

  19. A Web Browser...Definitely by peterdaly · · Score: 4, Funny

    If the name of keeping up with the leader of the industry, I think we should integrate Mozilla. A web browser is an integral part of a modern OS.

    -Pete

    1. Re:A Web Browser...Definitely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My vote goes to integration of an X-server and accelerated graphics drivers into the kernel.

    2. Re:A Web Browser...Definitely by arunarunarun · · Score: 1

      Well, there's already a web server in the kernel. What use is the server without a client. Woohooo! The FUN! Who needs an Internet connection! I browse my own pages, served by my kernel, using my kernel.

    3. Re:A Web Browser...Definitely by sketerpot · · Score: 1

      How about just integrating a web server with KDE? (I don't know much about GNOME, so I can't speak for it.) Konqueror does that, and thanks to the kparts stuff it can embed a lot of viewers for stuff.

  20. Two Kernel Monte by strredwolf · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.scyld.com/products/beowulf/software/mon te.html

    Already there.

    --

    --
    # Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
    $Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
    1. Re:Two Kernel Monte by Alex · · Score: 1

      http://www.scyld.com/products/beowulf/software/mon te.html

      Already there.


      How about reading the web page you link to?

      As it says it only support 2.2.x + 2.3.x kernels, and only 1 cpu at that. I'd hardly describe that as "already there".

      Alex

    2. Re:Two Kernel Monte by sjames · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Furthermore, it is a boot process (userspace apps terminate), it just uses the linux kernel as the bootloader rather than something like grub.

    3. Re:Two Kernel Monte by caseih · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is not what the original poster was asking for. The kernel monte actually just does an effective reboot without going throug the bios. As I understand it, the kernel monte cannot tranfer running processes from one kernel to another. Last time I used it, the monte killed all my processes, and reloaded init (basically rebooting).

      What the poster wants (and what I want) is the ability to load a new kernel, transfer the existing kernel tables (process, resource, driver status, etc) over to the new kernel and have things continue without interruption.

      Michael

    4. Re:Two Kernel Monte by wdebruij · · Score: 1

      clickable link : http://www.scyld.com/products/beowulf/software/mon te.html

      ( for lazy surfers)

    5. Re:Two Kernel Monte by metz2000 · · Score: 1

      That link again (clickable and working):

      Two Kernel Monte (Linux loading Linux on x86)
    6. Re:Two Kernel Monte by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree that this would be pretty damn cool. I've got to wonder if it's technically possible. IIRC, years ago here on /. (2.2.x era) there was something of a flamewar over the quality and features of Linux. Someone on the "con" side of the argument asked, "Where is the hot-patchable kernel?". Somewhere out there there is a commercial UNIX that can have code segments replaced on the fly (`dd if=a.out of=/proc/kcore'?). Perhaps something rsync-like could do this? I have a hard time imagining how this would work and doubt Linus would accept it.

    7. Re:Two Kernel Monte by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      I'm not exactly a linux guru (tho pretty experienced), but I'd like to know if it is possible to run a kernel in a virtual machine; and if so, what is the best way to go about it....and what pitfalls could one expect.....?

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    8. Re:Two Kernel Monte by grolim13 · · Score: 1
      I'd like to know if it is possible to run a kernel in a virtual machine; and if so, what is the best way to go about it

      That would be User Mode Linux.

    9. Re:Two Kernel Monte by shadowbearer · · Score: 1


      Thank you, that is *exactly* what I was looking for :)

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    10. Re:Two Kernel Monte by sjames · · Score: 1

      I second the recommendation for User Mode Linux. It's not quite like running multiple OSes under VM, but it's certainly getting there, and in practice its close enough for most purposes.

  21. Windows 3.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As long as I've got Solitaire and Minesweeper, I'm keeping my Windows 3.1 until Linux catches up.
    With 2.7 coming out next year, I estimate that Linux 3.1 will be out around 2005. Then, and ONLY then will I finally upgrade from Windows 3.1 to Linux 3.2
    (oh, yeah, first I gotta get out of this hospital bed...you see, I've been in a coma for the past twelve years)

    TDz.

    1. Re:Windows 3.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      KDE has clones of both Solitaire and Minesweeper. Oh, and Red Hat and Mandrake are at 9.x.

  22. What's the point of hot plug ram/cpu by TheLastUser · · Score: 1

    When you have to patch the kernel with security updates every week?

    I think that a mechanism to patch a running kernel would improve uptime more than the ability to replace processors.

    Also, some sort of buffer overflow prevention would be cool.

    Don't know if either of these is possible... I think solaris has some sort of buffer overflow protection.

    1. Re:What's the point of hot plug ram/cpu by sfire · · Score: 1

      Just out of curiosity, which patches to the kernel have you been doing every week?

    2. Re:What's the point of hot plug ram/cpu by bogie · · Score: 1

      No doubt this is a HUGE stretch of the truth. For anyone wondering it is NOT necessary to patch your kernel every week.

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
    3. Re:What's the point of hot plug ram/cpu by gekko513 · · Score: 1

      >Also, some sort of buffer overflow prevention would be cool.

      It's called Java.

  23. -1 Troll, -1 Flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    How about a desktop that doesn't look and act like it was designed by a retard?

    1. Re:-1 Troll, -1 Flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about a desktop that doesn't look and act like it was designed by a retard?

      we are asking for linux improvements not microsoft windows improvements...

    2. Re:-1 Troll, -1 Flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then how would you master it?

  24. If I prepare a specification for by rusty0101 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Disipation of excess heat via copper clad water cooling through food preparation areas, and they implement it as a kernel flag for improved overclocking processor utilization, can we start to say "Yes, Linux does include the Kitchen Sink"?

    --
    You never know...
  25. Nessisary Rewrites: SCSI, TTY by strredwolf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Linux Journal's May 2003 issue had an article from Rob Love about what's new in the 2.6 kernel (new VM, ALSA, improved IO subsystem, preemptive kernel) and with a few items: SCSI needs to be rewritten to make it smarter than the drivers, and the TTY code needs a rewrite -- "it's looking like to be hack."

    --

    --
    # Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
    $Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
    1. Re:Nessisary Rewrites: SCSI, TTY by Corgha · · Score: 2, Funny
      the TTY code needs a rewrite -- "it's looking like to be hack."

      or, to quote Alan Cox (emphasis mine):
      The entire tty layer locking is terminally broken

      *rimshot* Thank you folks; Alan will be here all week! Remember to tip your waitress!
    2. Re:Nessisary Rewrites: SCSI, TTY by parnold · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What about the ide layer rewrite which was started in early 2.5 but was later abandoned because of instability? story here If it was meant to be in 2.5 then it should shorly be in by 2.7.

      --
      this sig intentionally left blank
  26. Duh by grub · · Score: 3, Funny


    What Will Be in Linux 2.7?

    Plenty of SCO's intellectual property, duh!

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  27. FreeBSD-style jails by Hubert+Q.+Gruntley · · Score: 1

    But I'm not sure that's a kernel issue. Virtual server providers use FreeBSD jails (no CPU cost), or User-Mode Linux (10% CPU cost)

    --
    Laugh at my Lisp and I keeell you.
    1. Re:FreeBSD-style jails by bucky0 · · Score: 1

      You could also look at the Vserver package some people are working on. It's a kernel patch which achieves many things BSD jail achieves. And, it's under pretty active development

      --

      -Bucky
    2. Re:FreeBSD-style jails by jandrese · · Score: 1
      Laugh at my Lisp and I keeell you.
      Hey man no need to get so defensive, after all my other car is a cdr.
      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    3. Re:FreeBSD-style jails by ultrabot · · Score: 1

      Virtual server providers use FreeBSD jails

      Death row?

      Yes, it's late here.

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    4. Re:FreeBSD-style jails by alexandre · · Score: 1

      vserver maybe this will help :-)

    5. Re:FreeBSD-style jails by asuffield · · Score: 1

      FreeBSD jails are just a highly limited variation on POSIX.1e capabilities, which Linux has had for years (since the 2.2 kernel series, approximately).

      Unlike FreeBSD, Linux can revoke specific, individual permissions from uid 0, instead of just revoking them all. libcap provides the interface to userland.

      The only reason why they aren't in common use is because, well, FreeBSD jails are all hype. It's not "root" access to a "logical partition", it's a chroot where uid 0 is no longer really root. There isn't a huge difference between that and a chroot without any uid 0 users or setuid-0 binaries in it - you just have to know how to use chown and chmod.

      Of course, you then have things like filesystem ACLs, or SELinux, which the BSDs have no competition for.

  28. Not included, should be: by burgburgburg · · Score: 1
    Soup
    Pancakes
    Sweaters (pullover)
    Lug nuts (various sizes)
    Adamantium
    Hedgehogs
    Wishbones
    Brie (or any other cheeses, for that matter)

    This is just a short list, but when are the developers going to get serious on these issues?

    1. Re:Not included, should be: by AJWM · · Score: 1
      You left out:
      • a small wooden frog
      • a stuffed vole
      • a collection of antique toast racks
      • a rusty wand
      • a small bird in a wicker cage
      You may recognize the last two. The first three, and some others I don't remember, I added to the Adventure game running on the campus mainframe back when. (The inspiration was a comment in some computer magazine.) Actually useful to help map the maze of twisty little passages, all alike, but that's about it (no points).
      --
      -- Alastair
  29. summary please! by sir_cello · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't someone be maintaining a consensus list of items to be worked on - like a master feature list.

  30. Now that we've got bunches of 'em hooked... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is finally time for the Total World Domination module. Bwahahahaha!

  31. Kernel Sanders by KrackHouse · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The beauty of Linux (IMO) is the ability to tweak the kernel. Why not take advantage of the fact that there is source code to be modified and make it simple for the average user to recompile the kernel? It's an ugly, ugly process right now and a lot of people are running distro kernels that aren't as optimized as they could be.

    --
    What if Digg added local news and a Slashdot inspired comment karma system? ---
    http://houndwire.com
    1. Re:Kernel Sanders by broots · · Score: 1

      I totally agree with you. I think, in my opinion, they should tweak the kernel to use the most out of the ram and the CPU. Faster boot up times. Quicker X response. Different things like that. Optimization is good. Thanks,
      ~Broots

    2. Re:Kernel Sanders by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Optimized in what way? Distros all come with kernels compiled for various CPUs, it's not like people are running i386 kernels on a P4.

      I'd really love to see some benchmarks that show that you can get much of any performance boost from recompiling your distro kernel. I'd be very surprised to see any difference at all.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    3. Re:Kernel Sanders by zerocool^ · · Score: 1

      I'd really love to see some benchmarks that show that you can get much of any performance boost from recompiling your distro kernel. I'd be very surprised to see any difference at all.


      Eh, i think that you could get some added performance. Like, if you changed your compiler optimization settings such that you compiled for -march=athlonxp instead of 386 or even 686. And if you took a bunch of stuff out, like (heh) module support and filesystem types you don't use and initrd if you're not using it... If you tried to go through and make it smaller, it might help. Also, does anyone else hate redhat's kernel configs? tab-M-tab-M-tab-M-tab-M - let's make it a module!

      ~Will

      --
      sig?
    4. Re:Kernel Sanders by Zebbers · · Score: 1

      ugly? you click a check box...

      granted its harder than ms, but thats because it is customizable and ms isnt technically.

      an average user wont be modifying the kernel...look at ms..the kernel isnt modified.its a huge hunk of everything.

    5. Re:Kernel Sanders by pyros · · Score: 1

      There have been numerours discussions on building a kernel with -march 686 instead of 386. An I can't remember the big reason that is always used against it, I'm sure someone smarter than me can provide it. :p But regarding all the modules, that is done to make life extremely easier on the average consumer. People who go buy the retail box at a computer store to try it out won't like have to reconfigure and recompile the kernel when they buy a news scanner, or new TV card, or new video card, or whatever. They want to install the hardware, boot the machine, and install drivers if needed. By installing drivers, I mean pop in a CD and run a shell script that copies some .o files to /lib/modules and runs depmod -a and modprobe -a . Beyond that and you start to agravate the target market for the RH products. Also, having those config files there ready to go is awesome, I remember giving up trying to just build a module to load into my running kernel because I had no idea what the .config for the binary kernel was. That sucks when you have to build the whole freaking things just for one extra .o.

    6. Re:Kernel Sanders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's easy. Just change some simple registry values found on tweakXP.com and you can place the kernel in RAM (for those w/ extra RAM) and make windows fly. No 2 hr compiling necessary.

    7. Re:Kernel Sanders by archen · · Score: 1

      The question is should the average user recompile the kernel? Maybe, but exactly what do users expect to get out of this? Three check boxes that say :

      make my kernel run

      [] slower
      [] faster
      [] really fast

      There are a lot of odds and end options that you should really understand before you enable/disable them, and most end users don't want to do this, and those that do probably already read the documentation and do. Most people probably don't even know what sort of processor their using, so how would they know which one to select to optimize their kernel? Most kernel compile howto's are pretty clear. I mean even I can type what they tell me to. menuconfig is pretty clear about things, you have questions and they tell you if you should probably need something or not. I believe the kernel is probably one of the few things worth compiling yourself, but I really don't think it's for most people. I do however agree that the process could use some streamlining to make things a bit easier.

    8. Re:Kernel Sanders by KrackHouse · · Score: 1

      My vision is a distribution install option that comes with a precompiled kernel ONLY for installation purposes. It might get the latest kernel version source automatically and build a kernel right then and there based on your hardware and a clearly explained list of kernel options available to the user. Yeah, Linux would take a long time to install if it included a compile but in a couple of years we'll be compiling the kernel in a matter of seconds instead of minutes or hours.

      --
      What if Digg added local news and a Slashdot inspired comment karma system? ---
      http://houndwire.com
    9. Re:Kernel Sanders by sketerpot · · Score: 1
      Gentoo makes you compile your own kernel (or at least it is highly encouraged) and they've made it about as easy as it gets, which is still pretty darn hard, but not unmanageable (they have a GUI). There's only so much simplification you can do before the whole thing become useless---this is the kernel we're talking about. The most useful layer of user-friendliness I can envision is presenting the user with some simple choices of CPU and what role they want the kernel to play, like desktop, server, media appliance, and whatever else your twisted mind can dream up.

      I think that the "make menuconfig" system should better explain about kernel modules. I had a deuce of a time figuring out what key to press to get the LNE100TX ethernet card enabled, but once I found out, it was just one key.

    10. Re:Kernel Sanders by valdis · · Score: 1

      Sounds good for *some* scenarios. Remember that getting the latest kernel version source automatically can suck if:

      1) You don't have network connectivity (either currently, or don't plan to have it - a kiosk or similar?)

      2) You're trying to build a system to match the OTHER 3,284 machines already in the server farm.

      Also, especially in the embedded world, the build system may not be the target system. I certainly don't want to be saying 'make oldconfig bzImage modules' on a Zaurus......

    11. Re:Kernel Sanders by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 1
      Gentoo [gentoo.org] makes you compile your own kernel (or at least it is highly encouraged) and they've made it about as easy as it gets, which is still pretty darn hard, but not unmanageable (they have a GUI).

      Yeah, I agree. Gentoo definately has something to do with 2.7. *cough* *rolls eyes*

      There's only so much simplification you can do before the whole thing become useless---this is the kernel we're talking about. The most useful layer of user-friendliness I can envision is presenting the user with some simple choices of CPU and what role they want the kernel to play, like desktop, server, media appliance, and whatever else your twisted [twistedmatrix.com] mind can dream up.

      That's a terrible idea. Modules already provide away for the distributions to cater to virtually any hardware setup without losing performance for being the "jack of all trades." At any given time, no driver is loaded that doesn't need to be. A desktop kernel might need to support ten different sound cards. If it had any sense, it would build them as modules...but wait! Distros already build all the drivers as modules.

      If compiling a kernel is too hard for you, then I think Gentoo is as well.

      I think that the "make menuconfig" system should better explain about kernel modules. I had a deuce of a time figuring out what key to press to get the LNE100TX ethernet card enabled, but once I found out, it was just one key.

      Every single selection in the "make menuconfig" system is invoked with a keypress...and almost every single help section includes a blurb about modules and where to go for information.

      I've read your other posts. You don't care about Bayesian filters. You don't speak Python or Ruby. You're a fraud.

      --
      Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
    12. Re:Kernel Sanders by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Like, if you changed your compiler optimization settings such that you compiled for -march=athlonxp instead of 386 or even 686.

      You aren't reading, are you? As I said, distros usually already come with kernels optimized for all common arch settings. You install Red Hat on an Athlon, it's going to put in an Athlon kernel.

      As it is, gcc doesn't do very much for an Athlon, and as the AC pointed out, the new kernel doesn't even benefit at all from some march settings.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    13. Re:Kernel Sanders by zerocool^ · · Score: 1

      Ok, fair enough. But, i seem to remember some discussion on some debian message boards where some of the debian users were concerned that they were losing a lot of people to gentoo, and most people thought it was because debian only releases a 386 distro, and a lot of people want them to release a 686. I don't know if debian does the multiple kernel thing with the distro.

      --
      sig?
    14. Re:Kernel Sanders by XO · · Score: 1

      Already done.

      $ cd /usr/src/linux
      $ make install ...
      $

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    15. Re:Kernel Sanders by gebner · · Score: 1

      > It's an ugly, ugly process right now

      make-kpkg --rootcmd=fakeroot kernel_package

    16. Re:Kernel Sanders by sketerpot · · Score: 1
      What an amusing post! I imagine you fancy yourself quite witty, don't you? Still, I'm bored, so I'll refute what you say.

      Yeah, I agree. Gentoo definately has something to do with 2.7. *cough* *rolls eyes*

      I was using Gentoo as an example of something that handles some aspects of kernel setup. Sure, it doesn't do very much, since the kernel is a complex system and Gentoo wants to give the user lots of configurability there, but it does something.

      That's a terrible idea. Modules already provide away for the distributions to cater to virtually any hardware setup without losing performance for being the "jack of all trades." At any given time, no driver is loaded that doesn't need to be. A desktop kernel might need to support ten different sound cards. If it had any sense, it would build them as modules...but wait! Distros already build all the drivers as modules.

      I'm not talking about drivers. I'm talking about such things as the linux kernel preemtion patch. It can reduce latency, but some people have throughput concerns. There are surely other patches that might be better examples.

      Every single selection in the "make menuconfig" system is invoked with a keypress...and almost every single help section includes a blurb about modules and where to go for information.

      I know that, having used the program myself. It's just that sometimes a small but crucial detail will trip me up.

      I've read your other posts. You don't care about Bayesian filters. You don't speak Python or Ruby. You're a fraud.

      I do care about Bayesian filters, I do speak Python, I never said that I speak Ruby, I'm not a fraud, and you're the creepy stalker type. Goodbye.

    17. Re:Kernel Sanders by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Several kernels are available on debian, here's a few:

      kernel-image-2.4.16-386 - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.16 on 386.
      kernel-image-2.4.16-586 - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.16 on 586/K5/5x86/6x86/6x86MX.
      kernel-image-2.4.16-586t sc - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.16 on Pentium-Classic.
      kernel-image-2.4.16-686 - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.16 on PPro/Celeron/PII/PIII.
      kernel-image-2.4.16-686-sm p - Linux kernel image 2.4.16 on PPro/Celeron/PII/PIII SMP.
      kernel-image-2.4.16-k6 - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.16 on AMD K6/K6-II/K6-III
      kernel-image-2.4.16-k7 - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.16 on AMD K7
      kernel-image-2.4.18-386 - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.18 on 386.
      kernel-image-2.4.18-586tsc - Linux kernel image for version 2.4.18 on Pentium-Classic.
      kernel-image-2.4.18-686 - Linux kernel image 2.4.18 on PPro/Celeron/PII/PIII/PIV.

      They might not offer multiple optimizations of glibc, that might be what the issue was. I know red hat does offer multiple optimizations of glibc and other more performance critical things.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    18. Re:Kernel Sanders by rocketfairy · · Score: 1

      There's no reason for this to be a priority, because average users should never recompile the kernel, ever. Unless you're on a low-end machine, having an optimized kernel and an assload of modules isn't much slower than a fine-tuned kernel; when desktop systems get slow, it has a lot more to do with GNOME/KDE/mozilla/OpenOffice than with the kernel.

      Distros that focus on the average user ought to make sure every friggin' kernel module that could be necessary is included, so that end users (like me a few years ago) won't recompile and break things; it's a waste of everyone's time. This is not to say it's never a good idea to use a non-stock kernel, but if "make modules" scares you, fucking around with the kernel is a bad idea.

      Nate

  32. Unified Installer by headkase · · Score: 1, Interesting

    What I'd like to see is all the different dependancy based package managers like Red Hat's RPM system or Debian's Apt-Get be unified into a standard installer/uninstaller that all distributions can use.

    --
    Shh.
    1. Re:Unified Installer by pope1 · · Score: 1

      i think they already invented that a while ago,
      i'm pretty sure it was called 'tar'. =)

      --
      /* * pope1 */
    2. Re:Unified Installer by hermeshome.se · · Score: 0

      Although I agree with you, this is not a kernel problem, but a distribution issue.

      All after me: Linux is a kernel.

    3. Re:Unified Installer by Kethinov · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Damn straight. I'm a Gentoo man personally, but even portage is not a solution to this dependency hell problem. You should be able to download an RPM, double click it, and install a program without having to deal with solving dependencies manually. I really wish Linux would evolve beyond this trivial crap. It's the one thing that prevents me from recommending Linux to the average Joe (besides Gentoo's abysmal install process of course).

      --
      You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
    4. Re:Unified Installer by headkase · · Score: 1

      Yeah but with a GUI and uninstall information that would allow orphan packages (i.e. only needed for one application that you already uninstalled) to be uninstalled automatically for you.
      I probably deserved offtopic in my parent post - oh well. Linux newbie, typing this using the Knoppix Live CD so I mean it when I say, Thanks for telling me about tar! I just booted the terminal and I'm skimming the man page on it seeing how close it is to .zip which I'm used to.
      Cheers.

      --
      Shh.
    5. Re:Unified Installer by mccormick · · Score: 0

      You mention portage and RPM. What about the apt frontend to dpkg? You get not just the tool but the whole Debian project mirror network behind you with those two.

      The thing I'm still hoping for is a functional apt-src that can do all the same magic as apt-get but with source packages.

      --
      Pete
    6. Re:Unified Installer by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      working on it..... we're workin on it. now time for bed.

    7. Re:Unified Installer by ebbomega · · Score: 1

      So, like Synaptic?

      --
      Karma: Non-Heinous
    8. Re:Unified Installer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      make sure to use the compression option or it is a piss poor replacement.

    9. Re:Unified Installer by rweir · · Score: 1

      Um, that's what Debian's apt does. And it has for years. And there are GUI frontends (synaptic, kpackage, though neither can compete with aptitude). If your distro sucks, that's not a Linux problem.

    10. Re:Unified Installer by iantri · · Score: 1
      Debian's apt system is available for RPM-based systems as apt-rpm (see freshrpms).

      Also, Mandrake has urpmi which does essentially the same thing, but has a much greater software selection. Correct me if I'm wrong but the only source for apt-rpm is Freshrpms, right?

    11. Re:Unified Installer by LordMyren · · Score: 1

      how about using apt? apt handles dependencies for you. aptitude is a simply breathtaking apt front end.

      the problem isnt the kernel, its the tool's you're using with it.

  33. FreeBSD-style jails by Hubert+Q.+Gruntley · · Score: 4, Insightful

    FreeBSD jails rock. Root access to your own logical partition which looks and smells just like a dedicated machine, with no overhead.

    Virtual host providers can do it for free with FreeBSD, or with ~10% CPU load using User-Mode Linux.

    --
    Laugh at my Lisp and I keeell you.
  34. Don't have kernel needs but OS needs by Ossifer · · Score: 1

    I really don't have any real demands on kernel-level features. What I need is better support on the OS-level above the kernel, for things already supported by the kernel. For example, USB is kernel-supported in the current stable kernels, but support sucks at the OS-level. When will I be able to even hotplug a mouse or digital camera?

    1. Re:Don't have kernel needs but OS needs by pavera · · Score: 1

      In redhat 9 I hotplug/unplug a usb mouse and printer constantly on my laptop (haven't tried a camera, but mouse/printer works fine)

    2. Re:Don't have kernel needs but OS needs by swillden · · Score: 1

      For example, USB is kernel-supported in the current stable kernels, but support sucks at the OS-level. When will I be able to even hotplug a mouse or digital camera?

      Although it's possible that drivers don't exist for your particular mouse or camera, USB hotplugging works just dandy in 2.4.x kernels, and with the tools available (hotplug). It's actually quite a bit better than Windows' support, in my experience. For one thing it doesn't tend to get confused by the fact that my devices are sometimes plugged into the machine directly and sometimes plugged into a hub. For another, I don't have to notify Linux before I yank a device, or even a fully-loaded hub.

      What's really nice, too, is that hotplug allows you to hook your own scripts in that get automatically executed whenever you poke a USB plug into a port. I wrote one for my camera so that whenever I plug it in the script automatically downloads all of the images and then deletes them off the camera (after verifying that the download was successful). So I just plug in my camera, turn it on, wait for the beep that indicates the download is done and then unplug. Very slick. The script also uses EXIF headers in the images to drop them into directories by date.

      Or, if you don't want to write scripts, you can use gtkam, or if you use KDE just type "camera:/" into Konqueror's location bar and browse away, dragging and dropping pictures from your camera.

      As far as mice go, I've plugged a bunch of different USB mice into my systems and they all just work, as long as X is configured correctly.

      Frankly, I don't see a lack here. X configuration could be better, but that's an ongoing issue.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:Don't have kernel needs but OS needs by spektr · · Score: 1

      In redhat 9 I hotplug/unplug a usb mouse and printer constantly on my laptop (haven't tried a camera, but mouse/printer works fine)

      Hotline: Hello, redhat hotline, ...

      Shrike: um , ... my user is constantly plugging and unplugging the usb mouse... I think it's some kind of loop. It's getting rather annoying, how can I stop it?

      Hotline: Have you tried to print some random module dependency errors?

      Shrike: Yes, but it made everything worse. Shortly after that I expected a real rush of activity on the port which surprisingly stopped abruptly after 2089 plugging cylces, followed by a shutdown. After that I decided not to try this again.

      Hotline: Sounds bad. Normally this should not be necessary, but you could try to support USB not at all.

      Shrike: Can I do this without rebooting? Let's see, I move this memory area there and forcefully unload this mod$"&&%!...NO CARRIER

    4. Re:Don't have kernel needs but OS needs by phliar · · Score: 1
      Ye Gods, which distribution are you using?

      With RedHat 8 and 9 (and I suspect with every other "major" distribution) it's completely transparent. I plugged in a USB mouse wincing a bit because I knew I had a little experimentation and kernel compilation to do. Plugged it in, and goddam, it's working with X. The Canon G1 digital camera -- plugged it in, fired up gtkam -- and voila! it all works, with all the little thumbnails and all that crap. (I'd have been happy to mount it manually as an IDE drive after a little recompilation!) Hotplugging the USB mouse worked even on my laptop. I was a little surprised that installing RH9 on the laptop was a complete non-event. Linux device recognition has come a long way in the last couple of years.

      --
      Unlimited growth == Cancer.
  35. Re: NO DRM support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So we can play all our favorite programs and games

  36. Java Virtual Machine Module on the Kernal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We Should include Java Virtual Machine in the kernal. It could make run Java Apps in linux much faster. All the Jvms that i tried are slow especially for GUI.
    It could also help introduce Linux to the Desktop making applications that can run in Windows Linux and etc.. without recompiling and with the speed.

  37. Ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, that retard was well-paid for that design! He did it with his feet.

  38. Split out the drivers by 11223 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've been wanting this for a while - it's time for most of the drivers in the kernel to be split out. There's no reason why the kernel sources need to be as large as they are, and there's absolutely no reason why eg sound drivers and network cards can't be maintained independently with their own build process. Tying them to kernel releases means waiting until the next release for driver improvements, can bottleneck development, and leads to the 41M(!) tarball that is 2.6test7.

    This would require setting up a decent build process for modules outside the kernel, but that's a good thing anyway. Have you tried to compile the nVidia drivers lately? It can be a pain if your kernel headers aren't quite right. If there were a decent external API and good support for building third party modules, this would also make it easier for manufacturers to supply independent drivers.

    1. Re:Split out the drivers by mhesseltine · · Score: 1

      How about split out the architectures instead? Why do I have to d/l a tarball containing MIPS, SPARC, x86-64, PPC, etc. when all I want is the i386 branch?

      Since each architecture has its own branch in the tree anyway, what would prevent those from getting forked out?

      --
      Overrated / Underrated : Moderation :: Anonymous Coward : Posting
    2. Re:Split out the drivers by be-fan · · Score: 1

      This wouldn't work given how kernel development works. Sometimes, a core API will change, and all drivers will have to be updated. This happened recently with the taskqueue change in 2.5, and is happening again with the switch to the new driver API. It would be a royal pain to have drivers in seperate modules. Besides, nothing stops you from compiling drivers independently of your kernel. The NVIDIA and hfs+ drivers are compiled independently, for example.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    3. Re:Split out the drivers by swillden · · Score: 2, Informative

      there's absolutely no reason why eg sound drivers and network cards can't be maintained independently with their own build process

      Actually there is a practical reason why they're maintained within the kernel sources and not externally. The reason is that it allows the kernel developers more freedom to change the kernel. They don't have to worry about breaking a lot of dependent drivers because if they make a change that would break drivers, they have all the driver sources and can (and do!) go update them.

      Have you tried to compile the nVidia drivers lately? It can be a pain if your kernel headers aren't quite right.

      And this is an excellent example: because the kernel developers don't have the nvidia binary-only drivers in their tree, the drivers get broken quite frequently. You can argue that they should just stabilize the kernel API exposed to modules, but that would tie the developers' hands and force them into a lot of backward compatibility kludges. For better or for worse (and I think it's for better), that's not the Linux way.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    4. Re:Split out the drivers by battjt · · Score: 1

      How about, while we are at it, moving some of the drivers to user space to improve stability? I realize that there would be a performce penalty, but in most cases, I relish stability over performance.... I can buy performance. Joe

      --
      Joe Batt Solid Design
    5. Re:Split out the drivers by 11223 · · Score: 1

      This runs into the issue I described before - getting hw manufacturers to maintain drivers themselves is going to be less than successful so long as maintaining drivers independently of the kernel is so painful.

      Since when is freezing an API a "kludge"? I call it good software engineering.

    6. Re:Split out the drivers by Lozzer · · Score: 1

      That is a good reason to maintain them together, but not necessarily distribute them together. I'd guess the main reason is that once a developer gets enough knowledge to hack the kernel up this way, there are a lot more interesting problems to work on. And even if someone did manage it, its the kind of change thats hard to cut into small enough chunks for Linus to accept. There is alway the "your distribution should be dealing with this, why are you building kernels anyway?" argument as well.

      --
      Special Relativity: The person in the other queue thinks yours is moving faster.
    7. Re:Split out the drivers by Flossymike · · Score: 1

      If you could provide a link on how to do this, it would be cool.
      When after recompling a bit ago I realised that I hadn't compiled a loop back module it was a bit of a pain to have to recomplie the whole kernel it was fustrating.

    8. Re:Split out the drivers by swillden · · Score: 1

      getting hw manufacturers to maintain drivers themselves is going to be less than successful so long as maintaining drivers independently of the kernel is so painful.

      Only for manufacturers who don't want to release source to their drivers. For those who release source, it's easier, because while they can do the bulk of the work, they can also rely on others to pitch in and help them deal with kernel API changes.

      It is an obstacle for manufacturers who want to distribute binary-only drivers.

      Since when is freezing an API a "kludge"?

      Freezing an API isn't a kludge, but APIs that are frozen for a very long time require kludges to support them as the internals diverge further from the structures that gave rise to them in the first place. Periodic freezes are good -- and necessary -- and the Linux kernel does freeze the APIs in all of the even-numbered releases. But freezing them for longer will require workarounds. There is a valid argument that that's an acceptable cost, but Linus and the other major decisionmakers don't agree.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    9. Re:Split out the drivers by swillden · · Score: 1

      That is a good reason to maintain them together, but not necessarily distribute them together.

      I can't argue with that, really. The only downside to separate distribution that I can think of is that the driver distribution sites would still have to track the kernel versions closely and you'd have to make sure you downloaded the right version for your kernel version. Either that or the driver packages would have to contain multiple versions with some mechanism to decide which one is appropriate (and you couldn't necessarily just rely on looking at the kernel version number, since patches might affect the drivers).

      Okay, I changed my mind... I *can* argue with that :-)

      It seems to me that, on balance, the bandwidth and storage cost of downloading driver code you don't need is far less expensive than the work everyone would have to do to manage all the driver versioning and dependencies. As it is, when you download a kernel tree you have a reasonable expectation that all of the drivers in it work with the internals.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    10. Re:Split out the drivers by dissy · · Score: 1

      Maybe there can be two layers to drivers then.
      Perhaps call then 'direct kernel drivers' and 'external module drivers'

      One driver that comes with the kernel will be for a module API.
      This will remain the same for x.y.* in the stable branches, but of course in the odd y dev branches this wont really be true, but thats what they exist for.

      So, direct kernel drivers are what we have now for the most part. They stay with the kernel and can be updated like wise. Nothing changes.

      Then, you have an API you can turn on in the kernel. Perhaps even make a module.
      This API will be the same for say 2.4.*, and be the same for 2.6.*, but possibly different between the two.

      The kernel developers hands are tied as far as this API goes, but only until the next major kernel release.

      This would atleast give _some_ option for binary only modules and 3rd party drivers that just dont want them in the kernel for whatever reason. And still wont take away from the ever-changing life of kernel modules.
      A developer can submit their drivers to be included that way if some feature is not available from the API or the API is not good enough for their needs.
      As long as the API is good enough for some, id say its worth it.

    11. Re:Split out the drivers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do a du on the arch directories, and reconsider.

    12. Re:Split out the drivers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That move by itself doesn't improve stability. For instance, consider how well XFree86 is able to crash your computer, or at least your display/input. And that with user space drivers.

    13. Re:Split out the drivers by Uerige · · Score: 1

      What about this "Interface doesn't change when the major version number doesn't change" thingie?
      All we'd need is a new version numbering scheme, probably starting with Linux 3.0. Still, major and minor number mean the same. But when you download 'linux3.0-i386-main_1.1.tar.bz2' and 'linux3.0-sound_0.3.tar.bz2' you can be sure they work together. Developers should only make changes to the APIs when the x in 'linux3.x' changes. I don't see the problem in that, and the development version would be available in the old style 'linux3.1.77.tar.bz2' format.

    14. Re:Split out the drivers by swillden · · Score: 1

      What about this "Interface doesn't change when the major version number doesn't change" thingie?

      Might be a good idea. It could even be taken to the level glibc does (source compatibility within major releases, forward binary compatibility within minor releases, forward and backward binary compatibility within subminors).

      However there would have to be more benefit than just reducing the size of download tarballs. The Linux model is much simpler and much easier for the developers to manage. I'm speaking only of "internal" APIs used by modules, of course. The external, userspace, APIs are managed very carefully, because the developers can't just go fix all of the userspace apps they might break.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    15. Re:Split out the drivers by battjt · · Score: 1

      I don't run XFree86 on my servers. Some of my servers don't even have video cards. The thing is, I could do more isolation between apps if devices used by one wouldn't crash the other. Joe

      --
      Joe Batt Solid Design
    16. Re:Split out the drivers by be-fan · · Score: 1

      After you've done the first compile, you don't have to recompile the kernel just to add loadable modules. Just do 'make menuconfig' and then a 'make modules && make modules_install." That will build just any modules that need building, without touching the kernel. In 2.6, its even easier. Just do "make && make install" and the build system will automatically recognize if only a new module needs to be built and just build that.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    17. Re:Split out the drivers by Flossymike · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the reply. Would have thanks soon but been away ... no /. for more than a week!

  39. New perspective on things by peterdaly · · Score: 1

    Last time around suggestions were things that were needed to function as "real" server.

    Anyone else notice the "enlightened" comments here seem to be more aimed at matching Solaris this time around? Solaris (either purposly or not) may be put squarely in Linux's sights. Based on the track record of recent Linux developments, Sun should be worried. It's now or never to start coming up with a real business plan to address Linux. They can't consider it a "toy" for much longer and keep what little marketshare they are holding onto. On the low end, the Solaris advantage is already gone. Linux will soon be moving up the stack.

    -Pete

  40. RTFA Here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Here

    Other non-karma whoring mirror contributions accepted, you bozos.

  41. But of course... it's obvious by cyb97 · · Score: 1

    a kitchen sink!

    1. Re:But of course... it's obvious by schon · · Score: 1

      a kitchen sink!

      No, it has to be able to read and send email! We need SMTP and IMAP4/POP3 in the kernel! :o)

  42. Time to add a VM? by alext · · Score: 1

    Linux really needs a VM. (It could also benefit from that other rumored Longhorn feature, a database-backed file system, but that's another story...).

    OK, we can add Java or Python to our systems, but this still leaves Linux-the-platform facing two big challenges:

    1. Support apps for kernel functions have to be written in lowest-common-denominator C/C++, making, say, ALSA configuration difficult

    2. The number of very different frameworks providing essential functions (desktops, config management, web servers, security admin) is large, also these frameworks do not compare particularly well with Java or Dotnet/Longhorn equivalents.

    3. VMs have intrinsic advantages which, when widespread in Longhorn could make Linux-the-platform look obsolescent quite quickly. Security guarantees are one obvious area, application portability is another.

    1. Re:Time to add a VM? by smittyoneeach · · Score: 2, Funny

      ...two big challenges:
      1. ...
      2. ...
      3. ...
      <insert cheap shot here> or perhaps you expect the Spanish Inquisition?

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    2. Re:Time to add a VM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will you stop with the "Longhorn is gonna own Linux" Trolling already. Geeze your constant posts about how DonNet and WinFS rules and Linux is gonna be "left back" or getting annoying.

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=79861&cid=70 49 990

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=80321&cid=70 80 080

      I'm sure there are more, but how many times can you read the same stupid theory over and over?

    3. Re:Time to add a VM? by dan_sylveste · · Score: 1

      Agree! Not having to use C/C++ all the time will increase stability and remove a lot of buffer problems. There are VM out there which can do good stuff without needing 100 MB RAM.

    4. Re:Time to add a VM? by alext · · Score: 1
      OK, got one considered response - thanks!

      Evidence, if any were needed, of the huge disconnect between what /. thinks is important for Linux and what the IT market thinks.

      Out there, Java is probably the number one reason use of Linux is spreading in large organizations. Not unrelatedly, MS are betting the farm on their Java clone - Dotnet will be the biggest thing in the next version of Windows.

      Meanwhile, here at /. the top priorities are:
      • faster rebooting
      • upgrading the kernel online
      • supporting multiple schedulers
      • recompiling the kernel

      Hmmmm...
  43. Support for the DE Exellent10 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's my coffeemaker. Since coffee is our favourite beverage (and an integral part of the information culture) the kernel should reflect this by supporting a broad range of coffeemakers.

  44. Slashdot Load Balancing by cyber_rigger · · Score: 1

    would be nice.

    1. Re:Slashdot Load Balancing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a second there I thought your login was "cyber_nigger"...

  45. Isn't this like Dynamic Reconfiguration?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While not very prevalent in desktop computers, most commercial servers and 'Enterprise Level Systems' (ie high end/availability servers and mainframes) have the capability under other os's to configure (vary) boards, memory ranges, cpu's, and I/O devices offline, and out of the 'runnable' configuration. Once that has been done, if the hardware supports 'hot swapping' (which most of it in that class does); parts can be replaced while the remainder of the system chugs along. Once the new parts are in, they can be brought back into the running configuration and utilized again.

    I see no technical reason why such support could not be added to Linux and enabled should it find itself running on hardware with such capabilities.

  46. SCO Personality Module by prandal · · Score: 1

    Revenge is sweet :-) And no, I don't mean we should try to emulate Darl McBride's personality, either.

    Phil

    1. Re:SCO Personality Module by rongage · · Score: 1

      This would be sooooo easy to do, too...

      for (i=0;i < blocklen;i++)
      {
      Inst(i);
      usleep(10000);
      }
      --
      Ron Gage - Westland, MI
  47. "reversible" config by Wills · · Score: 1

    Wanted: The ability to edit any answer you give during make config without having to start over

    1. Re:"reversible" config by morcheeba · · Score: 1

      "make xconfig" or "make menuconfig" ?

    2. Re:"reversible" config by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      make xconfig

    3. Re:"reversible" config by Wills · · Score: 1

      make xconfig is only useful if you are running X (I'm not) and I find it's not very easy navigating backwards and forwards in make menuconfig because the interface is rather clunky and slow. I don't know why there isn't a version of make menuconfig based on a curses interface which would be much faster.

    4. Re:"reversible" config by Wills · · Score: 1

      Like I said above, make xconfig is only useful if you are running X (I'm not).

    5. Re:"reversible" config by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      make menuconfig

    6. Re:"reversible" config by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or you could just edit /usr/src/linux/.config
      =)

    7. Re:"reversible" config by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know why there isn't a version of make menuconfig based on a curses interface which would be much faster

      Wha??!?!? make menuconfig is based on curses.

      And it's plenty fast for me - even running remotely.

    8. Re:"reversible" config by Methlin · · Score: 1

      You mean like make menuconfig?

    9. Re:"reversible" config by DA-MAN · · Score: 1

      You mean the file that starts out as follows:

      # Automatically generated by make menuconfig: don't edit

      Yeah, I guess he can do that.....

      --
      Can I get an eye poke?
      Dog House Forum
    10. Re:"reversible" config by caluml · · Score: 1

      What about
      make xconfig
      ?

    11. Re:"reversible" config by madcow_ucsb · · Score: 1

      Speaking of menuconfig - am I the only one who has NEVER found a terminal emulator that can display it correctly???

      There've been times when I've needed to run it via a serial console (to a PC) and it's just completely unusable. Whether with HyperTerminal (ugh, that doesn't surprise me...), Terra Term, SecureCRT, ANYthing.

      I dunno if it's a termcap problem or what, but it seems like if I've got $TERM==vt100 and my terminal emulator set to vt100 then it oughta just work...

      Anyway, totally OT, but I never have much luck using linux console apps if I'm not actually on the console...

  48. Hardware detection by Brad+Mace · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Better hardware detection and auto-configuration would help old and new users get things running. I still can't get the scroll wheel on my stupid mouse working. Mice are simple and critical enough that they should be setup without any user intervention.

    Currently even fairly advanced users can get hung up trying to get hardware to work. Windows has a huge advantage in this area even though you usually need a cd of drivers.

    Even better would be a way to build a kernel that detects and includes support for your hardware automatically.

    1. Re:Hardware detection by EllF · · Score: 1
      In /etc/X11/XF86Config (or /etc/X11/XF86Config-4, if you happen to be using that -- it depends on the distro and the way X was installed; you could safely perform these steps in both files, if you have both), you need the following (as well as the device line, obviously:

      • Section "InputDevice"
      • Protocol "IMPS/2"
      • Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5"

      And that should do it, once you restart X. If this doesn't work, feel free to email me, or just post again.

      --
      We who were living are now dying
      With a little patience
    2. Re:Hardware detection by norite · · Score: 1

      This is more of an X issue, But I would like better plug and play type stuff for monitors - you plug in a new monitor, boot up and the vertical and horizontal synch ranges get configured automagically. No need to go to run level three, plug in new monitor, and configure... It can be done, as Windows shows...

      --
      -- Fuck Beta
    3. Re:Hardware detection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The Americans spent more than $1 million developing a pen that would write in space. The Russians used a pencil.


      Your sig is false.
    4. Re:Hardware detection by caseih · · Score: 1

      Having support in the kernel for devices and auto-detection and setup of those drivers are two different issues. Hardware detection and configuration (especially of removable devices) has been and should remain in user-space projects, such as hotplug, kudzu, and the Knoppix hardware detection routines. Most hardware devices need userspace support, anyway (such as setting up dev entries, modifying fstab etc).

      One just need pop in a knoppix CD to see just how plug-and-play Linux really is. Most of the time it just works. Better than windows at times.

      Building a detection routine into the kernel build process would be fantastic, though. How about taking this one step further. Have hotplug or some other monitoring program detect the new hardware, and if there's no driver already compiled, builds a module on the fly and loads it. A bit slow, but now slower than the windows wizard method for installing hardware. If you added the capability to have signed driver source code (and had a few locations of trusted code repositories, the program could go out and get the latest module code and try that.

    5. Re:Hardware detection by norite · · Score: 1

      Woohooo! Someone actually bothers to research my sig! Respect!

      --
      -- Fuck Beta
    6. Re:Hardware detection by Brad+Mace · · Score: 1
      Yes, that should do it, but it doesn't. I've noticed more mouse problems when KVM switches are involved, which may be part of my problem. I've made several attempts at this problem over the last few months, and I'm pretty competent. I've also seen many other people having the same problem. Hardware configuration in Linux just expects too much (at times) of the user.

      While it may be more of an X problem, I think the kernel should detect hardware and make it basically functional, leaving user space programs to change the default behavior.

      I also strongly agree with another response regarding monitor setup. Most people don't understand sync ranges and refresh rates. It's another fundamental part of the computer which should just work without the user having to know anything about the hardware (ideally).

      People aren't going to be very comfortable switching to linux when such basic components require such detailed knowledge to set up. The last monitor I bought didn't even list all the specs that X asked for.

    7. Re:Hardware detection by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      ...Ever heard of Knoppix?

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  49. What I would _not_ like to see in 2.7 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I think it's time to move ALL the network servers out of the kernel and into userland. If we run Samba and httpd in userland, why don't we also have nfs, ping and everything else also in userland? I know this is a radical change to the old traditional Unix concepts, but it's time to do it.

    The arguments against doing this are usually performance and security. I'll address performance first. Performance is a nonsense argument. With modern system interfaces like memory mapped files, running NFS in userland should be fast. If Samba and http are fast enough in userland, why not ping and NFS?

    The security argument is even worse. The whole reason to have these things in userland is because it is not safe to have them in the kernel.

    And that brings up the final thing I would like to see in 2.7: an easy way to run network servers as untrusted users. Having daemons (written in a language with no memory safety usually) handling unsafe data at the system's highest privilege level is foolish, dumb and not smart, basically.

    So that's what I want OUT of 2.7.

    1. Re:What I would _not_ like to see in 2.7 by chez69 · · Score: 2, Informative

      NFS used to be userspace and was slow as shit.

      --
      PHP is the solution of choice for relaying mysql errors to web users.
    2. Re:What I would _not_ like to see in 2.7 by Sunda666 · · Score: 1

      Doesn't SAMBA already run in userland?

      cheers

      --


      ``If a program can't rewrite its own code, what good is it?'' - Mel
    3. Re:What I would _not_ like to see in 2.7 by Craig+Davison · · Score: 1

      smbfs is a kernel module.

    4. Re:What I would _not_ like to see in 2.7 by DA-MAN · · Score: 1

      Not trolling, just curious... What the hell is a ping daemon?

      --
      Can I get an eye poke?
      Dog House Forum
  50. Kernel wishlist by Elektroschock · · Score: 1

    - better and more kernel documentation! - grid technology - security reviews, leak detection systems - bridge to W32 systems - easier kernel administration, kernel admin tools

  51. Nessisary Rewrites: SCSI, TTY-self-tuning. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about self-tuning systems. The net subsystem adjusting itself to whatever it's controlling. For example the ethernet connection can adjust itself, while the serial connection can be adjusted independently.

  52. I'll tell you what I want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    This or this.

  53. Network-transparent sound? by phliar · · Score: 1
    That would be a really cool thing to have: I've often wished I could do with sound what X lets me do with windows. But...

    Seems to me it could be done just fine in userspace -- why put it in the kernel?

    Maybe some sort of framework for allowing access to all devices from the network? That sounds like something hard that someone might want someday....

    --
    Unlimited growth == Cancer.
    1. Re:Network-transparent sound? by indros · · Score: 1

      Hell I would like my 5.1 sound to work properly in linux.

    2. Re:Network-transparent sound? by maelstrom · · Score: 1

      AFAIK ESD already does this.

      --
      The more you know, the less you understand.
    3. Re:Network-transparent sound? by shfted! · · Score: 1

      I think it would be nice to have sound treated just like X treats the display. Instead of a DISPLAY environment variable, use something like AUDIOOUPUT, using the same syntax. The arts project does something like this, but it's not completely there yet:

      • If I'm using arts on my local machine, and I run an app that uses arts for sound output on a remote machine, and I have audio network transparency enabled, the remote application will have its sound outputted on my local machine. Works great :)
      • However, if I have a client machine with X setup to query a remote X display manager for its display (which works great), arts programs on the remote machine do not know to redirect their output to the local client machine and instead try to connect to the arts server on the remote machine. If anyone knows a solution to this, I would be highly interested in knowing.

      Really though, just like remote displays are at the application level, so should remote sound, and I agree with what you're saying. It just needs to be fully implemented.

      --
      He who laughs last is stuck in a time dilation bubble.
    4. Re:Network-transparent sound? by Trigun · · Score: 1

      Just NFS mount your /dev directory. Problem solved.

    5. Re:Network-transparent sound? by sbma44 · · Score: 1
      I'm not sure how this would work... I mean, it's obviously simple for X to say "draw a window this size at this position" and the client can draw it, obviating the need for shoving a bitmap of that window across the network.

      I'm not sure how you envision doing this with sound (well, you could do it with predefined sounds, like system sounds -- bells and alerts and such, but I assume this is not what you want). All you could really do would be on-the-fly compression of sound, but the processing overhead would be pretty huge...

    6. Re:Network-transparent sound? by axxackall · · Score: 1

      not so fast - dev inodes do not work cross NFS.

      --

      Less is more !
    7. Re:Network-transparent sound? by axxackall · · Score: 1

      Sound (usually) folowes to your display. Perhaps instead of re-inventing the weel the sound channel has to be somehow embedded to X11. Of course kernel has nothing to do with it, apart it should provide the local sound interface for XFree server (once it will implement sound too) and/or other local programs.

      --

      Less is more !
    8. Re:Network-transparent sound? by msh104 · · Score: 1

      some sound deamons like arts ( esd? ) can already do this, the problem is that the arts api's are not supported by most programs. having alsa ( + oss emulation ) network transparent in the kernel will bypass those problems. about the overhead, i don't know exactly but my 100Mbit network has no problem server all my 5 pc's with audio. and in the near future everyone is going to have gigabit anyway, so i guess it is a speed v/s features issue. and because the speed will come, so will the features.

    9. Re:Network-transparent sound? by LDoggg_ · · Score: 1

      Though, Im not exactly sure how it works, the LTSP clients that I've set up have sound working through the network.

      --

      "If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
    10. Re:Network-transparent sound? by visionlink · · Score: 1

      network-transparent sound has been available in userspace for 10 years. rplay, nas, arts, and esd all do this quite well.

    11. Re:Network-transparent sound? by dissy · · Score: 1

      > Just NFS mount your /dev directory. Problem solved.

      Give that a try. I think you will be surprised for about 30 seconds until you see what happens.

      If I mounted your /dev directory on my machine at /mnt/not-my-dev/ for example, and I did a cat sound.wav >> /mnt/not-my-dev/dsp /mnt/not-my-dev/dsp will have a major and minor node number (From your system) and lets assume nether of us changed anything funky so both of our dsp devices have the same node numbers like they are suppost to (14,3).

      So my kernel sees im sending data to major X minor Y as listed on /mnt/not-my-dev/dsp

      My kernel knows those numbers are for the sound device, and thus plays the sound on my machine, like it is suppost to.

      Matter of fact, nothing is special about /dev

      As root, in any other directory of your system (home dir works)
      type mknod dsp-with-odd-name c 14 3
      (c = character device, 14 and 3 are the dev devices.. put any filename where i have dsp-with-odd-name)

      Then write to that file as you would to /dev/dsp. Will function the same.
      With NFS you have effectivly done that by copying someone elses /dev directory to your system.

    12. Re:Network-transparent sound? by Trigun · · Score: 1

      Aww, If you explain it too well, he won't try it. Where's the fun in that?

    13. Re:Network-transparent sound? by Empty+Threats · · Score: 1

      A really awful job of it it does, too. Awful latency, difficult configuration. ESD network transparency is useless to me, anyway.

  54. New SB Live! 5.1 Digital Drivers by didjit · · Score: 1

    I know this is specific, but it'd be nice if, by the time features get built into 2.7, someone could get with Dell/Creative and make a driver for the new OEM SB Live cards that Dell sells. It seems there's been no progress on this for a while, and lot's of people are getting these. Sure, flame me for getting a Dell, but this chipset (10k1x) needs a driver.

    1. Re:New SB Live! 5.1 Digital Drivers by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      Doesn't ALSA address that already?

    2. Re:New SB Live! 5.1 Digital Drivers by didjit · · Score: 1

      As far as I know ... no. This is the official statment from http://opensource.creative.com

      The Dell CT0200 -- The new Live 5.1 card from Dell (CT0200) is not based on the EMU10K1 chip, so the EMU10K1 driver available at SourceForge won't work with it. Fortunately, 4Front Technologies (www.opensound.com) has developed a driver.

      As I understand it, there has been no further progress.

    3. Re:New SB Live! 5.1 Digital Drivers by Jenty · · Score: 1

      sure not, why they should? linux sucks - you should know that by now. There's not so much hungry students willing to write drivers ;-)

    4. Re:New SB Live! 5.1 Digital Drivers by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      Well, that's different. You asked about 10k1 support, which ALSA does support, however, the card your talking about is not 10k1 based. Or rather, so says the information at the ALSA site.

      So, looks like you're stuck. Have you tried emailing anyone at ALSA or opensource.creative.com to find out if there are any updates? You might email Dell to see what their position is on the issue too. Just letting Dell know that people want an option might be a good start for them.

    5. Re:New SB Live! 5.1 Digital Drivers by didjit · · Score: 1

      10k1x is what I said. 10k1x is not 10k1. 10k1x is based on a slightly different chipset that uses some software decode for the dsp.

  55. +a thoosand informative by turgid · · Score: 1

    'nuff said.

  56. Articles? by sharkey · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't this be an "Ask SCO"?

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  57. First Patch! by lawpoop · · Score: 1

    DB Filesystem. If properly implemented, it can emulate a standard hierarchical filesystem for apps that need it. It would be just like an SQL query. "SELECT /usr/local/bin FROM hda LIKE redhat7.2" This would allow drag'n'drop [un]installation.

    --
    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
    -- Pablo Picasso
  58. Live repartitioning by Gonoff · · Score: 1

    like in Partition Magic, but without the reboot.
    Would go nicely with the hot swoppable HDD and memory.

    --
    I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
    1. Re:Live repartitioning by bytesmythe · · Score: 1

      It's called Logical Volume Management, and you can get it with Gentoo.

      --
      bytesmythe
      Hypocrisy is the resin that holds the plywood of society together.
      -- Scott Meyer
    2. Re:Live repartitioning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > It's called Logical Volume Management [ibm.com], and you can get it with Gentoo.

      ...or Red Hat, or Debian, or ... .

  59. Use MAS for transparent network audio. by MongooseCN · · Score: 1

    What about using MAS (Media Application Server) to provide network transparent sound? MAS already does this outside of the kernel and could be integrated into the kernel.

    1. Re:Use MAS for transparent network audio. by axxackall · · Score: 1
      XFree86 does its X11 job well on the user-land, why don't you suggest to move tothe kernel too?

      Hey, I've got an idea - let's embed to the kernel also: OpenLDAP, PostgreSQL and ... what else? GNOME?

      --

      Less is more !
    2. Re:Use MAS for transparent network audio. by Professor+Bluebird · · Score: 1

      Because they want to be more like Windows. It has the shell, and now IIS (in Win2003) right in kernel space.

    3. Re:Use MAS for transparent network audio. by axxackall · · Score: 1

      Windows? last time it was called DOS when everything worked as one big disorganized heap.

      --

      Less is more !
  60. Complete shared memory emulation by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

    I'd like to see virutual terminals running different OSes. ALT-F1 (Linux), ALT-F2 (Windows 2000) ALT-F3 (Solaris x86) complete with a filesystem shim to allow them to share the same partitions, perhaps virtual NTFS via Linux but also map out protected areas to keep OSes from stepping on each other.

    1. Re:Complete shared memory emulation by elgaard · · Score: 1

      Something like: http://nomadbios.sunsite.dk/
      ?

    2. Re:Complete shared memory emulation by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 1

      That's called Xen; it was on /. last week.

  61. Because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can schedual a kernal upgrade durring official maintanance windows.

    CPU's generally don't give you any warning before they fry.

  62. a grep by bicho · · Score: 1

    A grep on the configuration prompts would be great!

    I have to always look line by line to find the right module, and it is each time.
    yes, I am lazy and with a bad memory (well, not bad memory, that only goes to show that I dont recompile/reconfigure kernels so often as to learn the lines I need)

    --

    errera hunamum ets
  63. Native Support for SATA Drives!!! by goldspider · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The only barrier to me running Linux on my home computer is that Linux has no native support for serial-ATA hard drives. As such, of course, I am unable to install Linux.

    PLEASE include native support for SATA!!

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    1. Re:Native Support for SATA Drives!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmm.. my sii 3112 works ok. not perfect, but ok. This is on a 2.6pre kernel. you'll be ok soon.

    2. Re:Native Support for SATA Drives!!! by beakburke · · Score: 1

      My understanding is that SATA is transparent to the OS in that it requires no "special" drivers, the system sees it as IDE/ATA just like before, it is just the hardware connection that has changed, which allows for higher speeds. Now your motherboard chipset might not be supported if its really new, but i dont think its only SATA related.

      --
      ----- Question authority, but not ours. Hate the man, but we're not him.
    3. Re:Native Support for SATA Drives!!! by dasunt · · Score: 1

      The Silicon Image SATA chip SII3112[1] is supported in the 2.4.21[2] kernel and the 2.6.0-pre kernels.

      [1] There might be other SATA controller chips, but out of a dozen motherboards with onboard SATA and a few cheap SATA controller cards, they all have this chip.

      [2] You might need one of the non-vanilla patches. I *know* its in 2.4.21-ac. 2.4.22-vanilla has the SII3112 support.

    4. Re:Native Support for SATA Drives!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This might help
      http://www.e-aiyama.com/~toshi/Computer/Linu x/Live CD.html

    5. Re:Native Support for SATA Drives!!! by teg · · Score: 1


      The only barrier to me running Linux on my home computer is that Linux has no native support for serial-ATA hard drives. As such, of course, I am unable to install Linux.



      SATA works great in Red Hat Linux... worked under RHL 9, and with the current beta of fedora (no longer have RHL 9 installed on that system) I get about 50 MB/s on my 250 GB Maxtor SATA drive.

    6. Re:Native Support for SATA Drives!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean "SATAN" drives, don't you?
      A trademark of Evil Empire and Dominance Corporation.

  64. Ooh! by Greyfox · · Score: 1
    And have it autmatically download only the correct drivers from kernel.org when you configure the kernel. Now that would be cool!

    That and the BSD style jails. Those are cool too.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  65. Shouldn't that be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux 2.8 as 2.7 will be only the unstable development version and not the stable release version?

  66. What should be in the new kernel? by bluethundr · · Score: 1



    One word...NANITES!!!

    --
    Quod scripsi, scripsi.
  67. unfriendly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    get rid of dependency hell and start acting like a modern OS. yes, that does include all the clunky RPM and whatnot ways as well as compiling from source. If it's not a binary I can download, put wherever I want to and just run it, it's NOT userfriendly.

    1. Re:unfriendly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      get rid of dependency hell and start acting like a modern OS

      Hey moron, what does that have to do with the kernel?!?!

  68. We REALLY need by 222 · · Score: 1

    integrated animated search / office assistants! Seriously though, as someone mentioned in the embedding linux quick booting article, windows does have the edge on linux as far as a snappier boot time because it continues loading services, even while the user has logged in.
    It may not seem like a big deal with system uptimes of 1-2 years, but to the average user, seeing an insanly fast boot would definitly be impressive.

  69. Ultimate flexibility and scalability... by realyendor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would like to be able to share proc, mem, disk, and net resources across multiple machines (as is partially implemented in openMosix) AND run multiple instances of Linux on a single system (as in User-mode Linux). These two features combined would provide the ultimate solution in hardware resource flexibility and scalability in large server deployments. It looks like VMware Server provides similar functionality, but with cross-platform capabilities and at a cost of over $1500 per processor.

  70. Process Selectible Cache-Replacement Policy by scorp1us · · Score: 1

    One of the big problems with databases on Linux is that the system only does LRU replacement. This is horrid for databases that do sequential scans, because you are contunualyl replaceing what you just loaded a few megs ago. It is actually better to replace waht you just read, since you're done with it, and keep the other prior stuff in memory and then come back to it.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
    1. Re:Process Selectible Cache-Replacement Policy by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      This is why many databases implement their own caching schemes. I don't recall what-all is included in the new caching and elevator schemes, however, somethings may now be more tunable already.

    2. Re:Process Selectible Cache-Replacement Policy by scorp1us · · Score: 1

      It'd be great not having to double-cache everything.

      While 2.6 does have a better queueing algorithm, that says nothing about cahche replacements policy. At some point the decisions of the policy will be causing blocks to be read or written. I'm not satisfied that optimim interaction has been acheived. I'm sure someone could devise a system that auto tunes the two, but for now an ioctl() will do just fine!

      Incedentally, caching streaming media should be done in a MRU way, since the data will always change. Maybe we have some synergy with network level audio?

      --
      Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  71. Distro vs. Linux by Eberlin · · Score: 1

    I'm having a bit of a hard time defining the fine line between kernel and distro...especially at the driver level. I understand that stuff like Quanta and GIMP are not kernel stuff but are hardware drivers a kernel thing or a distro thing? (Network Cards and modems, for example)

    On a different note -- maybe I'm talking out of ignorance here but one of the things I've been looking for is encryption support. As in being to encrypt folders and files, etc. The closest I found seemed a bit scary to try with kernel patching and loopback or whatnot. Am I just looking in the wrong spots?

    1. Re:Distro vs. Linux by adamjaskie · · Score: 1
      I'm having a bit of a hard time defining the fine line between kernel and distro...especially at the driver level. I understand that stuff like Quanta and GIMP are not kernel stuff but are hardware drivers a kernel thing or a distro thing? (Network Cards and modems, for example)

      The Kernel is the lowest level code that is running on the machine. Linux IS the kernel. The kernel acts as a sort of translator between the hardware on your computer, and all the software that you run on the computer, including things like X Windows, KDE, Gnome, Apache, GIMP and Quanta. Drivers for your hardware are part of the kernel.

      A distro is basically a collection of software that runs on top of the Linux kernel. Redhat packages the kernel up, along with an installation program, and a whole pile of software.

      On a different note -- maybe I'm talking out of ignorance here but one of the things I've been looking for is encryption support. As in being to encrypt folders and files, etc. The closest I found seemed a bit scary to try with kernel patching and loopback or whatnot. Am I just looking in the wrong spots?

      Check out The GNU Privacy Guard. It is similar to PGP. You were probably looking at encrypted filesystems - An entire partition (or a filesystem contained within a file, thats what the loopback would be) that is encrypted, and uses kernel level code to mount it like any other filesystem on your comptuer, and decrypt/encrypt on the fly as you read/write to it.

      --
      /usr/games/fortune
  72. How about a spell-checker? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Nessisary"?

  73. How does Netfilter lag behind Packet Filter? by Darth+Daver · · Score: 1

    What does Packet Filter have that Netfilter does not?

    1. Re:How does Netfilter lag behind Packet Filter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What does Packet Filter have that Netfilter does not?

      An intuitive syntax

    2. Re:How does Netfilter lag behind Packet Filter? by russelr · · Score: 1

      Take a look at "Linux Security", 2nd Ed. by Bob Toxen. (See p. 462 and following for a critique of iptables vs. ipchains.) A lot of these points ring true from my use of iptables.

      I agree with the "clear syntax" criticism vs. BSD. It would be nice to be able to have rules such as the following:

      rule telnet from x to y

      Instead, you have to get into the nitty gritty of TCP state flags, etc. When what you really want is to just be able to enable or disable services. Something similar to Cisco Pix config would be nice, although this could be written as a front end to iptables or ipchains, maybe.

    3. Re:How does Netfilter lag behind Packet Filter? by Darth+Daver · · Score: 1

      I've been doing firewalls for a while, and I like the syntax, although I probably wouldn't mind something more beginner friendly. If syntax is the only shortcoming, write a layer of abstraction like a "nice" GUI. No kernel changes needed here.

    4. Re:How does Netfilter lag behind Packet Filter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you could try the fwbuilder,it provides a
      graphical frontend for generating pf, iptables and
      pix rulesets. Not for use as a crutch, but as
      a way of making huge complex rulesets that don't
      get out of control.

      As to your complaint about not being able to put
      a rule in like "rule telnet from x to y", i'd have
      to say that by not having the "gritty" syntax of
      iptables you may/(or may not) lose some very useful granularity.

      I use both netfilter and pf (in production environments), and am interested in hearing what pf's advantages are, other than subjective syntax advantages, to netfilter/iptables. ...(not trying to sound garrulous just want to know what the advantages might be if they actually exist)...

    5. Re:How does Netfilter lag behind Packet Filter? by russelr · · Score: 1

      What would be nice to have is the ability to manage your rules (and sets of rules) at a higher level. I don't have in mind a GUI so much as the ability to manage access lists and groups easily.

      For example, say you have a new service. This service uses a combination of TCP and UDP ports. You've got a minimum of 4 rules for outgoing traffic or 6 if you have stateful rules. It would be nice to have these sets of rules pre-defined and just say something like:

      enable xyzService from hosta to hostb

      VoIP or Real Audio services are good examples of multi-port protocols that require more than a few rules and become fairly complex when routing between multiple hosts.

  74. I thought hotplug CPU/ram was in 2.6?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought hotplug CPU/ram was in 2.6??

    what happened?

  75. RELIABLE Sound Card Detection at the Kernel level by voss · · Score: 1

    Other things...

    a) USB 2.0 at the kernel level
    b) Fixing the plumbing
    c) Mountless CD and floppy use

  76. Netfilter improvements by Gerald · · Score: 1

    Can we please change the configuration syntax from the bug-ugly iptables/ipchains style to something like the more human-readable styles that pf, ipfilter and the PIX use? Please?

  77. better laptop support by kbrannen · · Score: 2

    I see a lot of entries about application level stuff (yeh I got a list there too. :-) But laptops still have a lot of variables connected to the kernel:

    * APM / ACPI (still very hit & miss, and many vendors don't seem to follow the standard making it harder)
    * docking station support (sometimes works, sometimes it freezes hard)
    * hot swapping mice & keyboards (maybe 2.6 will make this better?)
    * Function (FN) keys don't work (you know, the vendor function keys that get you the keypad; this may be an X thing but I've never seen them work even under the console)

    Probably more, but that's a good start.

    On the app side, better video drivers would be my #1 wish. Many of the ones we have now for laptops are so incomplete or problematic (generally because the driver writers are at a real disadvantage working without specs; they do a great job with what they have, but the result can be hard to live with...such a catch-22).

  78. Device management by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

    How about a better /dev. Something that can handle dynamic devices. Something that only shows the devices attached to the system instead of 10,000+ . Something that actually works.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    1. Re:Device management by evil_one · · Score: 1

      That's what /proc is for - it tells you what's where.

      --
      Desperation is a stinky cologne
    2. Re:Device management by madcow_ucsb · · Score: 1

      Isn't that what DevFs is for?

    3. Re:Device management by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      Have you ever used it? It is not easy, intuitive or convenient.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    4. Re:Device management by madcow_ucsb · · Score: 1

      Hmm I always use it now and rarely have any trouble with it. It's only become an issue with brain-dead apps that insist on using the old names, but that's easy enough to work around...

    5. Re:Device management by superjaded · · Score: 1

      As of 2.6.0-test5 or 6, devfs is considered obsolete/deprecated, and AFAIK, will be totally gone from the 2.7 kernel.

      The replacement for devfs will be a userspace implementation called udev.

      There's an actual paper going around by the guy who came up with an implementation of udev, but I can't think of the URL for it offhand, so here's a little article/discussion on it.

      Actually, found the paper. Here's a link to it, in PDF format.

  79. Wishlists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google groups link for that discussion here.

    Responses from actual Linux kernel hackers (as opposed to blithering fantasists who post clueless wishlists to LKML) here: "Ugh, this is all crackpot wishlist gunk." and here: "If I see more nice "features" from people that are never going to write them anyways, I think I'll scream."

  80. A oft-requested but oft-ignored request. by GoNINzo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wish there would be default stack protection, right out of the kernel. I'm tired of these repeated buffer overflows, and I know people can code right around them even with stack protection, but at least an attempt to make it harder for stack busting would be nice.

    --
    Gonzo Granzeau
    "Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
    1. Re:A oft-requested but oft-ignored request. by alexandre · · Score: 1

      Well, you can always use GRsecurity if you're willing to take the performance hit (maybe 3% :).

    2. Re:A oft-requested but oft-ignored request. by cowbutt · · Score: 1
      I wish there would be default stack protection, right out of the kernel.

      That's in the kernel included in Fedora (formerly known as the Red Hat Linux Project) by default. It's called exec-shield.

      --

  81. NTFS by StillaCoward · · Score: 1

    How about some write support???

    1. Re:NTFS by Seiya235 · · Score: 1

      Last time I checked, it was there in 2.6. Keep up.

    2. Re:NTFS by FreeLinux · · Score: 1

      Last time I checked it was still "experimental" "dangerous" "data loss" blah blah blah.

      How about NTFS support that you can really use. I want to be able to treat an NTFS partition no differently than an ext2 partition. Also, the whining about it's undocumented and "Microsoft keeps changing the spec" hasn't affected these guys any. They managed to figure it out on their own and created a company to sell their DOS version and several other versions with full NTFS read and write support. It has been available for years.

    3. Re:NTFS by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      NTFS does have write support in 2.6, it's limited to write operations that don't change filesize, but it is extant. Problem with full NTFS write support is that NTFS is totally undocumented and internally evil, requiring massive time and effort to write a compatible layer that can create and resize files. Now, were MS to write a spec on how NTFS was put together, the kernel developers would more than likely have a much easier time writing a driver for it. Course, that doesn't seem too likely given Redmond's track record.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    4. Re:NTFS by Phishcast · · Score: 1

      Aren't the Sysinternals guys using licensed Microsoft DLLs to accomplish this?

    5. Re:NTFS by caluml · · Score: 1

      And I quote:
      created a company to sell their DOS version
      Do you see what's different between the free version you get in the kernel, and the version you are talking about?

    6. Re:NTFS by red+floyd · · Score: 1

      Yep. NTFSDOS copies a few DLLs off of your hard drive and uses them to access NTFS.

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    7. Re:NTFS by FreeLinux · · Score: 1

      Yes, I see the difference. Do you?

      In the case of Sysinternals, a couple of students figured out how to mount NTFS partitions for reading and later for writing. They decided that the writable version had value and built a company to sell that version. This is rather like the Yahoo! story where, a couple of students developed a search engine and built a company around it.

      In the case of the Linux community, a whole bunch of guys said: "It's undocumented and it's too hard to figure out without the documentation. Besides, Microsoft keeps changing the spec so, there isn't any point in putting much effort into it. Use Ext3 instead."

      The thing is that there are others that have also figured it out. Look at all the imaging software that can read and write NTFS partitions. I know that some simply do sector copying but some actually read and write the NTFS file system itself.

      The state of NTFS support in Linux is very similar to the way it use to be with Winmodem drivers. For years Linux developers and users berated modem manufacturers for making Winmodems. The story was that Winmodems could NEVER work on Linux. They were undocumented and they were built specifically for MS Windows blah blah blah. But here we are today and, surprise surprise, Winmodems can and do work under Linux. All it took was for someone to figure out how to write the driver.

    8. Re:NTFS by caluml · · Score: 1

      Well you pay that whole bunch of guys to spend time working on it, and then you can give it away to the community.

      I'm not trying to argue - but you have to see that working hard, poring over obsolete documentation, dumps of data for no payback has got to be hard. Especially when not that many people will use the ntfs write function. How many people dual boot (don't forget to count all the servers in this) ? 5%? And how many of them --need-- to write to that NTFS partition? 5% of that 5%?

    9. Re:NTFS by BoneFlower · · Score: 1

      NTFS write support isn't all that important to existing dual booters- they already have a way to share data that needs to be shared, or else they wouldn't be dual booting.

      NTFS write support will, however, be truly useful to those who don't use Linux yet. It will lessen one of the main inconveniences to dual booting. That will make it easier to convince people to give Linux a try. People who are wishy-washy about it might not be willing to commit to an extra FAT32 partition eating even more space away from their NTFS drive, on top of the Linux partitions. They might not want to set up a system on the lan to function as a file server. They might not want to commit to burning CD's, or floppies, and what about those 50 megabyte files that are too big for a floppy but waste a CD? NTFS write support would be a godsend to these people- "Hmm... I can't read it from windows, but if there is something on there I need in windows, I can just copy it to the windows drive before I reboot..." That will get quite a few more people to try linux.

    10. Re:NTFS by caluml · · Score: 1
      That will make it easier to convince people to give Linux a try.

      Nope. People that dual boot to give Linux a go, never really reboot. Cold turkey is the only way. Backup data. Wipe, format, install, and restore data. Set up browsing, mail, messaging, etc. Learn the differences. Away they go.

    11. Re:NTFS by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      If Linux could right NTFS it would once again be a great windows repair tool.

      As things are the number of computers I can bott with knoppix and work on is quickly dwindling.

      If knoppix could throw swap and home directory on an NTFS partition it would be a great way to use Linux at work without anyone throwing a hissy fit.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  82. Nice to have in kernel space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about having a default printer device within kernel space which is expandable by a printing system which allows networking. It would be a great benefit for application programmers to have a default printer without the need to make hacks for all the different printig systems available in Linux.

    A sound system should be available at boot time. All the available sound systems make it inconvenient for programmers to make good sound programs or games for Linux. Creating a default and standardized VoIP system using some kind of embedded Linux could be done easily and would bring Linux into the massses (Linux Phone system...)

    Encapsulate X window networking into a separate layer to get Linux started faster into a graphical GUI

    The library loader needs far too long to load symbols from shared libraries. This should be tweaked.

    It shouldn't be necessary to have different kernels for single and for multiprocessor systems

    The boot manager should get a real command line interface to have the possibility to check the hardware before the boot process

    A hardware clustering manager should be included into the kernel to allow clustering of blade systems easily just by activating and configuring it from some kind of administration console

    There should be a graphic adaptor administration layer to get graphic cards better integrated into the system. There should be some kind of standardized graphics API to make it easier for graphic card manufacturers to design drivers for Linux

    1. Re:Nice to have in kernel space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about having a default printer device within kernel space which is expandable by a printing system which allows networking.

      I don't know what you're asking for - this already exists.

      It would be a great benefit for application programmers to have a default printer without the need to make hacks for all the different printig systems available in Linux.

      Umm, "all the different" - as in BOTH of them (LPR and CUPS)? Which are already completely transparent to the application?

      A sound system should be available at boot time.

      Define "Boot time" - before the kernel loads? That's a job for Lilo or Grub. After the kernel loads? It already is.

      Encapsulate X window networking into a separate layer

      WTF do you think that X is!?!?!?!? It's a separate layer.

      It shouldn't be necessary to have different kernels for single and for multiprocessor systems

      It isn't.

      The boot manager should get a real command line interface to have the possibility to check the hardware before the boot process

      Again, this has exactly what to do with the Kernel proper?

    2. Re:Nice to have in kernel space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, "all the different" - as in BOTH of them (LPR and CUPS)? Which are already completely transparent to the application?

      So you could configure OpenOffice.org to lp without the need to have Cups or lpd to be installed and configured ? Which one should be configured ? Cups or lpd ? Is there _one default printer available in _every Linux distribution ?

      A sound system should be available at boot time.

      Define "Boot time" - before the kernel loads? That's a job for Lilo or Grub. After the kernel loads? It already is.

      ALSA ? RPD ? JACK ? OSS ? As you see thousands are available but none is configured as default sound system in _every Linux distribution...

      It shouldn't be necessary to have different kernels for single and for multiprocessor systems

      It isn't.

      If you use a dual processor motherboard with only one processor on board and configure a SMP kernel then you get a kernel panic...

      The boot manager should get a real command line interface to have the possibility to check the hardware before the boot process

      Again, this has exactly what to do with the Kernel proper?

      look at the boot process of Solaris and you know what I mean

    3. Re:Nice to have in kernel space by surprise_audit · · Score: 1
      The boot manager should get a real command line interface to have the possibility to check the hardware before the boot process

      Got that already... My Compaq Armada laptop has a diag partition that I can boot from Grub. I think it's basically a DOS partition with autoloading diag utilities.

      On the other hand, if you're thinking of something like Sun's Openboot prom, with power-on-self-test routines and a command line interface that allows you to test individual bits of hardware, that's not a Linux or boot manager issue. That's down to the BIOS manufacturers. For the boot manager to start at all, you have to have a mostly functioning system (cpu, memory, hard/floppy disk, etc). Do it in the BIOS and you only need a functioning CPU (OK, and serial port and other infrastructure, to be able to see what's happening, but you need those for diags in the boot manager also).

  83. Certain changes to /dev/input & console by temojen · · Score: 2, Informative

    When useing multiple USB keyboards all keyboards can be accessed through /dev/input/keyboard, and input from all keyboards appears on the console. (unless you don't insmod kbdev.o, and instead use /dev/input/eventx, which disables the console unless you also have a PS/2 keyboard, as well as useing a decidedly non-console like api)

    If instead there were /dev/input/keyboards optionally linked to the console, and /dev/input/keyboard0..n (like it is with USB mice), we could use multiple video cards and an appropriately modified X to build multi-seat workstations, POS terminals, etc without needing Xterminals.

    PCI VGA ~$50 vs ~$500 /XTerminal

    1. Re:Certain changes to /dev/input & console by Ben+Hutchings · · Score: 1

      I saw mention of something called "Ruby" in the linux-kernel discussion thread, and it turns out that this is a project that does exactly what you're asking for (and what I was hoping to be able to do at home recently).

    2. Re:Certain changes to /dev/input & console by theTerribleRobbo · · Score: 0

      Because of the "Ruby" scripting language, this is very difficult to google for.

      Any specific links you could point us to?

  84. Freeze the darn API by Jordy · · Score: 1

    The API for drivers should be static at least for the stable revision of the kernel. This would allow binary drivers to actually work properly.

    Windows and MacOS seem to do it.

    --
    The world is neither black nor white nor good nor evil, only many shades of CowboyNeal.
    1. Re:Freeze the darn API by be-fan · · Score: 1

      The API for drivers should be static at least for the stable revision of the kernel. This would allow binary drivers to actually work properly.
      >>>>>>>>>>>
      Never going to happen. Linus has decided that technical quality takes priority. Also, the kernel developers don't have a dedicated driver compatibility team like Microsoft does, and trying to maintain binary compatibility would be too much trouble. Its easy for user-space programs, but drivers are (necessarily) too close for that. Don't worry, hardware developers will figure it out. NVIDIA seems to be doing fine with it, and if the Linux market is worth it to a company, they'll deal with it. Or better yet, open up hardware specs! I don't care how cool you think or NIC design is, there isn't anything there people haven't seen before...

      Windows and MacOS seem to do it.
      >>>>>>>>
      Windows and MacOS also have terribly messy, kludgy kernels, burdened by decades of backwards compatibility. Even OS X is a schizo melange of old 4.4BSD, Mach, NetBSD, FreeBSD, and new Apple (the I/O kit) code. They are *not* what you point to in a discussion about kernel design.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    2. Re:Freeze the darn API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd point to NT long before I'd point to linux as an example of decent kernel design.

    3. Re:Freeze the darn API by be-fan · · Score: 1

      You'd be wrong. NT is riddled with design flaws. Its true that most of these were not originally there, but they got put there over time. Unlike NT and Darwin, the OSS kernels are actually cleaner today than they were years ago.

      Some examples of NT's design flaws:

      1) Too much of a dependence on heuristics over stable algorithms. The VM system is a good example of this.
      2) Shizo wanabee microkernel. Tons of stuff (even the GDI) is in kernel mode, so there is no stability gain, but there is still the overhead of talking to a system server (crss.exe).
      3) Too much stuff overall in the kernel. The GDI doesn't belong in the kernel, and there is talk of putting parts of the CLR and SQL into the kernel to support WinFS.
      4) Too many hacks designed to get good interactivity. The priority boosting mechanism is an example of this.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  85. Transparent crash recovery... by Yaa+101 · · Score: 1

    Nice would be, with non deamons first, to have a transparent crash recovery in where a copy of the data segment is made redundand and spawn in a newly started fork when a crash ends the original application.

  86. How about... by rongage · · Score: 1

    How about throwing Postscript in the garbage - where it belongs....

    Oops - not in the kernel.... sorry about that. My Bad.

    --
    Ron Gage - Westland, MI
  87. Better hardware support by cyb0rg · · Score: 2, Insightful

    More work on drivers for hardware with emphasis on making it easier to detect/install/manage your hardware.

    It would be really nice if the kernel was more plug-and-playish (microsoft reference not intended).

  88. Design by /. by mendepie · · Score: 1

    I think the idea of design by /. takes design by commitee to a whole new level.

    God help us all.

    --

    Are you paranoid if you know that they just want to know everything you say and do?

  89. What Linux needs by chrysrobyn · · Score: 1

    1) Reduced code bloat.
    2) Reduced memory footprint.
    3) More features.
    . /sarcasm

    Come on. Linux does what most of us want already. It's the Pentium II of OS kernels. For icing only:

    Get something going with Xfree86, find out what hooks they want for better performance.
    Talk with NVidia and ATI and find out what common API that's not DirectX9, but is both open in specificaion and foreward thinking enough to expand to meet tomorrow's needs.
    Settle on what it takes to require GCC3.X as the compiler so distributions can ship with just one GCC version.
    Get a command line option to prevent printing out all the copyright notices (the corproate equivalent of teenagers' "shoutouts" -- does the warez community still do "greetz"?) and only print out error messages.
    Howabout a file system (ext2?) that you can fsck while mounted RW (even if the output is "all is well" instead of actually doing fixes)?

    And an uptime counter that gets me past 430 days or however many it resets. That's the one thing BSD has over us.

  90. What, no Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V?? by brundlefly · · Score: 1

    What, no Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V??

    *ducks*

  91. Different Link to Thread by Resaurtus · · Score: 1

    I got nothing at the link posted in the article, Heres a link to the conversation at another archive: http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0310 .1/0187.html

  92. Strongly agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Drivers and network servers should all be taken out of the kernel. Having drivers in the kernel is about as lame as having a web browser in the kernel. I'm sure you will get lots of flame resposnes to this post from people who don't understand that doing a little more context switching is not nearly as bad as the downsides of having drivers in the kernel.

    1. Re:Strongly agree by battjt · · Score: 1

      I agree, but can you site example OS's that do this? What do the generic device APIs look like? Joe

      --
      Joe Batt Solid Design
  93. Finally: Hotplug CPU support by Random+BedHead+Ed · · Score: 1

    I can't think of how many times I've sat around playing with the GIMP and pressing refresh on Slashdot, when suddenly a thought hits me: I need a new processor. Right now.

    So I run out to the computer store and pick up an AMD or Intel CPU, and when I get back ... damn and blast! I have to shut off my computer before I can install the new CPU.

    But never again! Once 2.8 comes out it'll just be pop ... pop ... new CPU! I've waited for this a long time.

    Now back to the Slashdot F5'ing. Hey, a German consortium wants to standardize vehicle software. Finally!

  94. umm... why? by digidave · · Score: 1

    You guys are retarded. Why are you worrying about 2.7 when Emacs will replace the kernel by then?

    --
    The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
  95. something like /etc/hosts.deny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make it easy to block IP ranges just by adding them to a file /etc/hosts.deny like in the following example

    # RIAA
    208.225.90.0-208.225.90.255
    # MPAA
    198.70.114.0-198.70.114.255

    1. Re:something like /etc/hosts.deny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I mean something like /etc/hosts.deny which allows IP ranges to be configured as blocked IP ranges without the need of ipchains. Easily to be configured from an everage user

  96. A mixer that works per application by iplayfast · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It bothers me that the mixer doesn't have separate slides for each app volume. (I know the slides aren't kernel, but the tech behind them is). Since sound comes from many sources, it would be nice to be able to set the volume levels of each source. For example, I've got festival and xmms, (which for those who don't know, it's a speech synth, and music). festival is quiet, and xmms is loud. There is currently no way to make festival loud and xmms quiet.

    1. Re:A mixer that works per application by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This would be a good addon for accessibility support.
      Most of the accessibility stuff is implemented in Gnome (KDE uses the Gnome implementation) but there is not enough accessibility support at console level

    2. Re:A mixer that works per application by 4front · · Score: 1

      Check out http://www.opensound.com/virtmix.html

      Is this what you are looking for?

  97. Re:What I (and THOUSANDS of others WANT) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A decent file dialog!

    The current one in Linux sucks!


    Umm, Linux (being the kernel) doesn't have a file dialog.

    why cant I have a little folder icon with an arrorw on it?

    It also doesn't have folder icons.

  98. Re:RELIABLE Sound Card Detection at the Kernel lev by adrianbaugh · · Score: 1

    ALSA sound card detection works fine here, never had a problem over a range of sound cards. Anyway, shouldn't detection be in userspace as far as possible? Others: (a) modprobe ehci-hcd (works on 2.4 here) (c) modprobe supermount (don't think this is in Linus' tree yet but it's readily available as a patch)

    --
    "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
    - JRR Tolkien.
  99. Rendezvous by js62 · · Score: 1

    How about Rendezvous support? I think it would make Linux networking much easier to use.

  100. Re:Johnathan Feruken Conspiracy !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is teh pure g3n1u5.

  101. Change Driver Model!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The one area that Windows still holds for usablity is the installation of drivers. A setup program, a few next clicks, and done. Linux... a gut wrenching kernel recompile. For 2.7, take the lead!!!

    1. Re:Change Driver Model!!! by rongage · · Score: 1

      Well, if you go with a completely modular kernel, then you already are there. You can add and remove kernel level device drivers at will, while the system is running.

      Of course, this takes up a huge amount of hard drive space (bloat) but it get's you where you say you want to go. Our setup program is called "modprobe" and it doesn't require any clicks.

      If you want even more fancy stuff going on, then check out the hotplug system (look on http://freshmeat.net - search for hotplug). When setup correctly, hotplug takes care of the modprobe stuff for you!

      --
      Ron Gage - Westland, MI
  102. A few things we really do need (IMHO) by jd · · Score: 2, Insightful
    • SGI's Asynchronous I/O would be very useful
    • Lustre network FS seems mature enough to be a really good inclusion
    • Anything from SGI's ProPack that helps with scaling. If they can do 1024-processor boxes, then we aught to be able to, too!
    • One of the real-time patches (eg: RTAI) would be a cool addition, especially if it had no negative impact if not enabled.
    • I'd want to see the COMEDI patches for CAM devices, too. Hey, drivers are a Good Thing. Convince people Linux can handle the hardware, and you'll get their attention a lot quicker.
    • Devfs should NOT NOT NOT NOT be removed. It's a good concept, and that should be reason enough. If it's "abandonware", then threaten to bombard someone with the skills & time with SCO sourcecode until they submit and take it over.
    • USAGI's IPv6 should definitely be put in.
    • There are IGMPv3 patches out there, which really should be included.

    --
    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)
    1. Re:A few things we really do need (IMHO) by Micah · · Score: 1

      devfs is being replaced with udev, which is supposedly a much better implementation of the same concept.

      And I agree it's a good concept. But udev is where it's going, so eventually devfs should be taken out to avoid duplication.

  103. Decent ACPI support. by IANAAC · · Score: 1

    without a kernel recompile, I might add.

    1. Re:Decent ACPI support. by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      There was supposedly a lot of ACPI stuff added to 2.4.22; and all the drivers were reworked to better support ACPI in 2.6. I haven't tried either, so I could be wrong.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
  104. PF would be great by ansible · · Score: 1

    I really like using PF on OpenBSD, and would love to see it on Linux. I think it is much more powerful and easier to configure than any other filtering system for a F/OSS operating system.

    Please, please, pretty please!

  105. Intellistep And a bean feast while you're at it... by doublem · · Score: 1

    Support for Intel's damn power saving "feature" where it throttles down the CPU on laptops. Even when I disable it in the BIOS, my laptop still runs at 400 mhz in Linux on AC power instead of the 700 I paid for!

    And while we're at it...

    Sentience

    That's all I ask.

    And the ability to pick stocks with the precision that worries the NASD.

    Oh, and complete subservience to my will, so my machine will always obey me.

    Wait, this is Linux, it already has that last feature. :)

    Seriously though, I'd love to see a defrag utility come out for Linux. I know the file systems supposedly don't need it but PHBs will love it, and whoever is selling a nice GUI version of the thing will make a mint.

    I want file by file transparent compression, so I can specify a file be sored in a compressed form and all Linux applications open and use it without knowing it's different from anything else.

    Identical capabilities for encrypted files.

    Indexing of documents, so I can search files that contain phrases with SQL style syntax.

    Real time updates to the database that 'locate' uses.

    FIX THE DAMN CUT AND PASTE IN LINUX!!!!!

    All in all, none of this is really Kernel stuff, but this is what I want.

    --
    "Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
  106. NO MORE LASER PRINTERS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really HOPE that they will finally remove support for laser printers. I've been asking repeatedly, for over three years now, for this feature. I don't get why it's still in there. How hard could it be to remove support for laser printers? I mean, come on!

    This is the one feature preventing us from replacing Windows with Linux in my organization. The time has come stop supporting laster printers NOW!

    1. Re:NO MORE LASER PRINTERS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? How does removing support make it more desirable?

    2. Re:NO MORE LASER PRINTERS! by Nutria · · Score: 1

      I think (hope) he was being funny...

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  107. What's that smell? by Outland+Traveller · · Score: 1

    ... it's the sweet stench of shoveled shite.

    Your post might be more useful if it said something concrete, definite, provable.

  108. Yes, but how... by Kjella · · Score: 1

    ...will the Linux devs doing that become rich and famous? If I knew of a way, I'd integrated it waaaay deep in my OS and make my own insanely profitable desktop OS monopoly...

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  109. SCO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully more SCO code for increased stability and scalability!

  110. Whatever by devphil · · Score: 1


    This week's meeting of the Linux Mutual Admiration and Masturbation Society kicks off with

    However, don't ever claim that Sun's kernel is in general superior to Linux.

    ...followed by a list of small specific examples. Unfortunately, in general it is still superior. I can make changes in the running kernel (instead of rebooting). I can set control variables for the kernel on future reboots (instead of recompiling the entire thing). Individual kernel modules can have their own read-on-module-load-by-the-kernel config file; in Linux the only general way of tweaking modules' control values is by editing the source. Maybe they read conf files, maybe not. Maybe they provide writable /proc files for runtime control, maybe not. The Solaris /proc is well designed and backwards compatible, don't even get me started on the dumping ground that is Linux /proc. (I hear in 2.6 it'll be split up into sane pieces, like Solaris has always done. Good!)

    The new devfs trees under Linux -- hey, those are remarkably similar to the devices tree that Solaris has been using for years. Not in appearance -- the Linux naming scheme loses a lot of information, in order to become more readable by humans -- but in purpose and thought.

    So yes, there are specific places where Linux whomps all over Solaris, and specific places where the reverse is true. After many years of daily use, programming, and administration of both of them, I've found that Solaris is still in general ahead in maturity and clean design.

    I think Linux continues to borrow -- to embrace and extend, as it were -- the good ideas from Solaris, like it's done with the examples above, with shared object versioning and other ideas. If the trend continues, and I'm sure it will, then Linux's overall design strength will be passing up that of the Solaris kernel in a couple more years. But don't go around claiming that Linux is obviously all-around king just yet.

    --
    You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
    1. Re:Whatever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i'm glad you retorted....i'm a linux user, but i knew that other guy was talking out his arse.

      what you said makes sense.

      but,

      (you knew that was coming)

      linux the kernel, and the gnu software surrounding it, are going somewhere.

      sun, it's software, and hardware

      are going nowhere.

      good day.

    2. Re:Whatever by TheOrquithVagrant · · Score: 2, Informative

      And here we go with the woefully mis-informed Solaris-advocacy again.

      > I can make changes in the running kernel (instead of rebooting).

      What "changes" are you talking about here? Modules in linux can be loaded and unloaded without rebooting, and that most definitely is "making changes in a running kernel".

      > I can set control variables for the kernel on future reboots (instead of recompiling the entire thing).

      Ok, here's the thing that really irks me. Where do you people GET this idiocy from? Does SUN feed you this BS at courses or something? You can set control variables in Linux on future reboots. Just edit /etc/sysctl.conf. However, in Linux, all these control variables can also be set _without_ even rebooting. And this is the real riot: you can set plenty of control variables in Linux without a reboot which in Solaris REQUIRE a reboot. Just issue "sysctl -p", and the new values in your sysctl.conf will be effective immediately. It's a hell of a lot nicer (my opinion, of course) than having to fire up the kernel debugger (*shudder*) to change dynamic variables, like you have to do in Solaris. To give an example, in Solaris SysV Shared Memory parameters are not dynamic and can only be changed by editing /etc/system and then doing a reboot. In linux, these are tunable on the fly.

      And here follows more displays of fascinating ignorance/misinformation:

      > Individual kernel modules can have their own read-on-module-load-by-the-kernel config file; in Linux the only general way of tweaking modules' control values is by editing the source. /etc/modules.conf will set your read-on-module-load-by-kernel control values. No recompiles needed here either.

      No argument about the mess that is /proc, except to say that /proc is a sometimes _useful_ mess sinnce it allows for tuning things on the fly that Solaris will only allow you to change with a reboot... like the abovementioned SysV shared memory settings.

      No argument about devfs either. This most definitely IS something that solaris does better, and where Linux is catching up.

      My own general impression from working with Linux and Solaris both, however, is that Solaris may be better in a few, small, specific areas mostly relating to really huge boxes, but that Linux stomps big time over Solaris in most areas, including areas where pure ignorance makes Solaris-advocates believe Solaris is superior.

    3. Re:Whatever by devphil · · Score: 1


      Dunno where you get "misinformed" from. I've been using Solaris on a daily basis for six years.

      Where do you people GET this idiocy from? Does SUN feed you this BS at courses or something?

      Stop being a jerk. We get it from man pages, printed manuals, and experience. We use it, we don't make it up. The things you claim require a reboot do not. As for the "display of ignorance/misinformation," you follow up by... agreeing with me.

      --
      You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
    4. Re:Whatever by TheOrquithVagrant · · Score: 1

      I realize that my post was possibly a bit unclear, since you apparently misunderstood most of it. Either that, or your reading comprehension sucks. Or a combination of both. The "misinformed" was in relation to your ignorance about _Linux_, not Solaris.
      I definitely should have started it out with "Here we go with the misinformed Solaris-advocates" not "Solaris-advocacy". And even that skews the meaning somewhat, since it's not your information about Solaris I'm questioning, its your misinformation about Linux, in relation to Solaris. I have run into far too many people who push Solaris over Linux, and who have the most bizarre ideas about what Linux lacks in comparison to Solaris. A bunch of the things you brought up have also been echoed by them. That's why I wondered if the misinformation about Linux was fed to Solaris admins/developers by SUN, through courses and similar - since the Solaris-advocates so often get the exact same things wrong about Linux.

      The things that I claim require a reboot (in Solaris) however, were taken out of a SUN manual. I checked right before i posted, because I haven't worked with Solaris 9, and hence, I wanted to see if things had changed since 7 or 8. They hadn't.

      I refer you to:
      http://docs.sun.com/db/doc/806-7009/6jftnqsj7 ?a=vi ew

      Only one of the parameters are marked as Dynamic: yes. The rest are Dynamic: no, meaning, according to an earlier section of the same manual "Boot-time initialization only". If this is incorrect, I suggest you write SUN and tell them their manuals about their own operating system is either wrong, or unclear.

      As for me agreeing with you, I agreed with you on only about only two things, proc, and devfs. In the rest of my post i was correcting your factual errors about Linux, and hence disagreeing with the percieved advantages you were claiming for Solaris.

      And finally, as for this:
      > Stop being a jerk.

      I can only say, if you want civil responses, don't start your own posts out with stuff like:

      > This week's meeting of the Linux Mutual Admiration and Masturbation Society kicks off with

    5. Re:Whatever by devphil · · Score: 1


      Dude, this is Slashdot. You're not allowed to agree with me, and we can't have a civil conversation or we'll get posting privs revoked. It's in the rulebook; see the "Minimum Flamage Quota" clause.

      --
      You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
    6. Re:Whatever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude you lost the argument big time, next time you start a discussion involving anything technical lose your bias. Please.

  111. Re:RELIABLE Sound Card Detection at the Kernel lev by Drantin · · Score: 1

    ...By mountless do you happen to mean auto-mounting?

    Or is it something like telling xine to use /dev/cdroms/cdrom0 for DVD playing...

    --
    Actio personalis moritur cum persona. (Dead men don't sue)
  112. Before hotplugging those... by devphil · · Score: 1


    ...I'd like them to get basic USB hotplugging support working first without hanging my system or throwing /sbin/hotplug into an infinite loop.

    As to your ideas, patching a running kernel is not trivial. Solaris has a "kernel debugger" with an interface like ed(1) that lets you peek/poke certain control variables in a running kernel. For the buffer overflow protection, you're thinking of the switch that makes program's stacks non-executable, support for which I believe is somewhere in glibc already.

    --
    You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
  113. 2.7 IDE Eclipse Plugin Wishes by hackus · · Score: 1

    What I would like, is some sort of plugin directory tree for Eclipse, in part of the 2.7 Kernel Tree that allows one to auotmagically build the make environment, and kernel switches required for a variety of kernel testing activities such as:

    1) Performance Testing
    2) Video Driver Development
    3) Sound Driver Development
    4) Storage/RAID Driver development
    5) USB Peripheral Development
    6) Firewire Development
    7) Removable HotPLUG PCI device development

    All of these in a directory included with the 2.7 series which anyone can just drop these plugins in ECLIPSE and they automagically setup the environment to start debugging the kernel.

    Kernel debugging is incredibly complex. It is also complicated by the fact many times you need two machines to do the debugging.

    Finally, another IDE plugin could be developed that allows code completion/KERNEL API completion.

    This would link into a database somewhere, say on kernel.org, perhaps an XML service, that the IDE would download when it started up, or download just the changes since last debugging session.

    Idea is to alert you of API changes to the kernel, so you are at the latest API, and don't end up getting depricated.

    Anyone think this is too way out there?

    -Hack

    --
    Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
  114. What will be in Linux 2.7? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully Windows. Then I could get all of my (not even new) hardware to work.

  115. Decent Support by Apreche · · Score: 1

    Maybe some more decent Serial ATA support. I still can't get this thing to work well. And how about writing data to ntfs partitions without completely destroying them. That would be excellent.

    --
    The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
    1. Re:Decent Support by kylegordon · · Score: 1

      I don't know about SATA support, but I recently used the ntfs modules in 2.4.22 to write data to an XP NTFS partition. The fix program that you're supposed to run after unmounting failed totally, so I thought I would boot into XP just to see how it went. XP didn't even blink an eye at the new data. No scandisk or anything, it all just worked magically.

  116. Mirror by Fiznarp · · Score: 1
  117. Floppy / CD-ROM auto mount, unmount by killerkalamari · · Score: 1

    I'd like to see the option (not default, but an option) to be able to have mount points that behave like MS-DOS or Windows, where it assumes that a disk is mounted.. if that was wrong, error. It assumes it's the same disk, if that's wrong (i.e. can't find the file), error or remount. calamari

  118. Safe Video by cgreuter · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'd really like to have an interface to the video system that is both fast and safe. At the moment, it's one or the other. Either I use straight X11 or I let the program bang on the hardware directly via DRI, SVGALib or the like.

    I'd like to see video drivers in the kernel. Not necessarily full-featured OpenGL drivers, but something that:

    1. Sets where in memory the card is allowed to read and write so that usermode programs can't trash system memory.
    2. Provides a reliable way to reset the video state so that we can easily get the display back to a sane state after something crashes.
    3. Provides fast, well-defined access to common (i.e. not cutting-edge) video functionality, possibly by letting the user program memory-map the frame buffer, so that simple graphics stuff is easy to do and doesn't need
    4. Provides a mechanism for applications to use the cards' advanced features (e.g. 3D hardware) so that binary-only device drivers are still possible, although not as part of the kernel. (This isn't strictly necessary from a technical point of view but I don't think most of the video card makers will release GPL'd drivers for their crown jewels. They might allow them for the basic stuff, though.)
    5. Associates video state with virtual consoles so that I can switch between graphical applications by hitting ALT+Fn. (Okay, this one isn't strictly necessary but it's really cool.)

    Of these, #4 may not be possible to do safely, or may only be possible for some cards. If so, it would still be a win because a lot of applications will do fine with only the basic functionality and over time, as the bleeding-edge stuff becomes mundane, it will slowly trickle into the #3 category.

    1. Re:Safe Video by temojen · · Score: 1

      #5 is already done, it's called XFree86. Try "startx -- :1" when already running X. then you can flip back and forth between them by pressing CTL-ALT-F1 for :0 and CTL-ALT-F2 for :1.

  119. an easier configuration system by chocobot · · Score: 1

    I read somewhere that some guy had tried to integrate a python script into the kernel packages that resolves dependencies in kernel configuration options, but it wasn't accepted for some reason. Something like that would be great, because configuring is a pain in the arse! It would also be great if this script could choose the most plausible options for a specific machine (optimize for processor x, include large mem support if mem>4096 MB...)

  120. Common Features. by technix4beos · · Score: 1

    It's really great to read all of these posts regarding cpu hotplug support...

    However, I want to address the more common features for the "desktop" linux (read: consumers) that I feel is missing at this point.

    • resolution change on the fly
    • network authentication (PAM modules)
    • drive management

    Resolution Change

    I have yet to find a distribution that allows quick and easy video graphic resolution change. By this I mean being able to click an icon (ala monitor icon in winblows) and choose the resolution to flip to, instantly.

    Can someone tell me a way to make this easier than logging out, adjusting xfre86 configuration and logging back in again? If there's an easier way, I'm all ears.

    I am very impressed at the support for monitors, I mean the list is huge in xfree86. I just wish there was better presentation of all the available values one could set.

    Network Authentication

    The authentication module and the SMB browsing password prompt must go further. It should be possible to have a per-machine user/password setting so that when one browses a win2k network that have differing authentication schemes, it will be smart and use the values you told it earlier.

    For that matter, PAM support still is not complete. Various HOWTO sites give a nice guide, but this kind of thing can be better configured in the first place, no?

    Drive Management

    I noticed something when changing what I thought was the label of a mounted drive on the desktop in RedHat9 recently... It started to immediately copy files when I hit Enter to accept my name change. WTF? Isn't linux smart enough to be able to change the mounted volume name? That is most bizaare.

    Some sort of Mounted Volumes manager must be easily accessible from the desktop. It's not. Can this be changed?

    These are my three points for the day. I'm not trying to be too critical. I love linux and the direction it's heading in. I just feel there are a couple of "common feature" issues that need addressing.

    Thanks. I hope someone more qualified than I can answer my questions.

    --
    user@host$ diff /dev/urandom /dev/uspto
    1. Re:Common Features. by imroy · · Score: 1
      • Resolution change.
        Are you really changing your "resolution" that often? Why? What for?
      • Network Authentication.
        Not sure what you're going on about here. What are these settings/values you talk of? I'm using LDAP authentication with a OpenLDAP running on a spare server, so it's not like I'm totally clueless about this sort of stuff.
      • Drive management.
        Once again, not sure what you're going on about. Are you complaining about a GNOME problem? I use GNOME as well, but I still do most of my stuff from the command line. Perhaps Nautilus was trying to move the contents of the old FS to a directory with the new "name" on the parent FS.

      Unfortunately your three suggestions, as interesting as you might think they are, are not related to the Linux Kernel at all. I suggest you take your list to the XFree86 (or Xouvert), Linux-PAM, and Gnome people.

    2. Re:Common Features. by technix4beos · · Score: 1

      Oops.

      I guess that was the one word that I overlooked. ;)

      "kernel".

      Yeah, I'll try to make these suggestions to the right people, as you suggest.

      thanks. ;=)

      --
      user@host$ diff /dev/urandom /dev/uspto
    3. Re:Common Features. by sqrt529 · · Score: 1

      the newest XFree86 can change resolution while running and the newest gnome has a utility to help you with it.

    4. Re:Common Features. by WgT2 · · Score: 1

      Concerning resolution changes there are two commands that will increase or decrease your screen resolution.

      (Drum roll, please...)

      "ctl (+) alt (+) -"
      and
      "ctl (+) alt (+) +"

      However, these two little humdingers might not return you exact results you expected. On my system I get odd results like a magnified screen with a virtual desktop that will not display everything on my monitor at once. X will still show that which is off the screen if I move my mouse toward it. Otherwise it most likely be the solution you were hoping for.

      P.S. I don't know if when doing this that your X configuration could have incompatable resolutions that are not supported by your monitor whereby 1) the screen could go blank, or 2) at worst there is an incompatable refresh rate that gets sent to your monitor thereby damaging it.

  121. One word: by shfted! · · Score: 1

    Why?

    --
    He who laughs last is stuck in a time dilation bubble.
  122. Maybe change... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The stupid license?

  123. wishlist of random things by Erik+Hensema · · Score: 1
    • All drivers should build as a module, even the ones needed for mounting the root fs and executing /sbin/init. Users should be able to add modules to the kernel image without recompiling the whole thing -- even without having the original source tree.
    • friendly boot screen. users don't need those frightening white characters on a black screen. A nice picture with progress bar will do. Of course also provide a bootscreen=debug option for the 'old' messages.
    • Crash dump support -- dump the memory to the swap device on a kernel panic, please!
    • Better IPv6 support. Make it possible to build the kernel without IPv4 support, but with IPv6 support. Don't change the kernel image when building IPv6 as a module.

    And yes, I know most of these things are at least partly implemented now. However none of them are ready for prime time yet.

    --

    This is your sig. There are thousands more, but this one is yours.

    1. Re:wishlist of random things by red+floyd · · Score: 1

      See MDK 9.1. Not only do they have a "friendlier" bootscreen, it's themeable!

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    2. Re:wishlist of random things by Sits · · Score: 1

      Users should be able to add modules to the kernel image without recompiling the whole thing -- even without having the original source tree.

      I have recompiled a module on Red Hat 9 without recompiling the whole kernel (they provide a tool called the module development kit faciliating this on their kernels).

      However I'm not wholly sure I understand the second part of your request. If someone has built a module against your exact kernel they can just give you the resulting binary and you can use it without recompiling. In order to compile a module though, you must have the kernel source available configured for your system. Without the configured tree how do you know what needs to be compiled to match the running kernel? How do you know even know which kernel to match?

  124. Found some stuff to put into it... by theendlessnow · · Score: 1

    I was walking down the alley and noticed some code listings from Netware. Some pretty good ideas, they just need to be GPL'd. There probably at least 100,000 lines of stuff we could add.

  125. exhancedd process management... by user138 · · Score: 1

    What I'd like to see is some kind of mechanism that would allow proecsses (and their children) susspended and saved, allowing them to be started (from their previous state) in the future. Even after reboot, or even transfered to a different machine or user. Also (i posted this to coreutils mailing list as well) it would be nice if you could nohup running processes (like solaris). .02 JGraham

    1. Re:exhancedd process management... by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      I have always thought that ACPI support alone ought to cover this.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  126. VPU Recovery by tugrul · · Score: 1

    #2 seems to be on M$FT's mind as well.

    If the graphics processor hangs (in the middle of a game for example), VPU Recover acts by resetting the VPU, enabling the end user to continue right where he left off. Depending on the state of the system when VPU Recover was activated, you may be able to recover with all of your open applications intact. In other cases, these applications may have to be closed and you're kicked back to the Windows desktop, but at least you don't have to go through the slow process of a complete system reboot.
    According to ATI, this feature is a requirement in Microsoft's next-generation Windows operating system, codenamed "Longhorn". So essentially, ATI is ahead of the curve, to the advantage of anyone who owns an ATI-based video card.


    Source

    I couldn't find a neutral (not associated with the new ATI drivers) reference to this requirement. Wonder if this feature with manifest itself in ATI's promised regular updates to their Linux driver.

  127. .5 AOL by adb · · Score: 1

    Where do you imagine you would get the modules without first mounting the root filesystem? A "friendly" bootscreen is probably not an appropriate thing for a user who is up to creating a custom kernel. It seems to me that this should be left up to distros, who probably want their own bootup screens anyway. (But perhaps convenient hooks for that sort of thing could be added so that each distro doesn't have to come up with their own hack.) Yay IPv6! Yay crash dumps!

  128. KGI by MenTaLguY · · Score: 1

    This is what KGI, the kernel portion of the GGI project implemented (during the 2.3 series kernels), but the project exhausted its social captial in arguments with Linus and others and KGI never got merged.

    --

    DNA just wants to be free...
  129. Yeah, yeah, sorry by TheLastUser · · Score: 1

    Exageration. Just meant to say that it would impact downtime more than failing processors, something which I have yet to run into.

    1. Re:Yeah, yeah, sorry by valdis · · Score: 1

      The difference is that you can pre-schedule a system bounce to install a patch - it's easier to deal with when you know it will be 2:05AM Saturday night.

      You rarely get that luxury with failing processors, unless it's an IBM z-Series that will spare out a processor for you and then call home for a replacement, or you have the HAL9000 reporting that the radio antenna will undergo critical failure within 72 hours.

  130. Mouse support by Tekoneiric · · Score: 1

    How about the ability to use a any mouse on either the PS2 or USB ports without having to change the selected driver?

    Or how about the ability to assign a PS2 mouse and keyboard to one video card output and the USB keyboard and mouse to another video card output to give the ability to login one person on each interface grouping.

    --
    *It's not what you can do for the Dark Side but what the Dark Side can do for you!*
  131. Bad memory mapping by CyberVenom · · Score: 1

    It would be good to have the ability in the kernel to (optionally of course) run through a full memory scan and map any bad memory. This way the kernel can avoid allocating the bad memory and allow the system to run reliably at least until the memory can be replaced. This could be very useful in a remote environment where physical access to the hardware is not immediately available.

  132. netfilter to pf? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, maybe a human-readable configuration syntax like pf has would be pretty cool for Netfilter.


    and before you linux idiots flame me, go read the man pages for pf. compare to netfilter. hit head on wall. repeat as needed.

  133. kernel panic analysis tools by menscher · · Score: 1
    While we'd all like to think that linux never crashes, it simply isn't true. Here it crashes fairly often. Yes, it's probably hardware at fault. But it'd really be nice to know which hardware. Every UNIX I know of has some tools for helping the admin make that determination (seen it on IRIX, AIX, etc). Linux does not.

    Related to this is the need to save the kernel panic core dump to the swap partition, and have tools to analyze it. There are projects working on this, but it really needs to be in the mainstream kernel.

    Finally, drivers, drivers, drivers! My gf (yes, you can read /. and have a gf) is a long-time UNIX admin. She's just started getting into linux, and is constantly complaining about the lack of drivers, the instability of the software, and various other aspects. And, after adminning some commercial unices, I can see where she's coming from. Drivers would be a good start. (Just to avoid OS flamewars, she got on a Windows box for the first time ever this week, and she doesn't like it either. And no, I don't think she's ever touched a mac.)

  134. Nope by FreeLinux · · Score: 1

    My DOS boot floppy has no trouble accessing NTFS partitions and it has no .dlls on the floppy.

    1. Re:Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's how the Read Only driver works. The pay-for Read-Write driver uses Windows DLLs.

  135. allow reloading partition table. by iceco2 · · Score: 1

    no reason to reboot just because I repartioned
    the Hard drive. it should be as simple as:
    unmount repartition, reload table. mount.

    I do not enjoy reboots.

    Me.

  136. Binary Kernel Module API by mcrbids · · Score: 1

    How about a decent binary kernel module API so that companies can release decent binary drivers and kernel modules without having to release a copy for every conceivable compile option?

    --
    I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
  137. Facts, anyone? by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 1

    Get the facts, dittohead.

    --grendelkhan

    --
    Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
  138. Ok, here's my list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Relocatable processes, from host to host. For example, I'd like to be able to move this screen process I'm running running (and all its children) to another machine on my network.
    2. Encrypted swap
    3. Loopback encryption
    4. Ability to change framebuffer mode without rebooting

    Some of these are possible now, but you have to apply a 3rd-party patch (eg, the kernel has Crypto modules, but no loopback encryption support). I'd be nice if they were in the default src tree.

  139. Eliminate filesystem mapped devices by zgwortz962 · · Score: 1

    I've been developing device drivers my entire career, on many platforms, including FLEX, Idris, UNIX, DOS, Windows (from 3.0 up), Mac OS and Mac OS X, and now finally I've started dabbling in Linux drivers.

    And you know something - I was appalled to realize Linux was *still* using filesystem mapped device I/O, much of it still embedded in the kernel. C'mon, get out of the eighties, here!

    At the minimum, the entire device hierarchy should be made totally modular. There is no excuse for a device driver to be compiled into the kernel -- sure you can keep them with the kernel sources and even in some rare cases require they get recompiled with new kernels, but they should never be compiled *into* the kernel. That's a good first step.

    Then a new, modern driver architecture should be introduced. I personally like the IOKit architecture in Mac OS X, although it has it's own problems, and there are plenty of other approaches one could take. I hesitate to say it, but there are even a very small number of ideas in WDM which are worth considering. (Microsoft *can* come up with good ideas, occationally... They just can't implement them anywhere close to competently, or without throwing in some idiotic addition that ruins the original idea...)

    As a temporary measure, the old device mechanism could be emulated through higher level drivers in the new device architecture for a year or three - that way existing programs won't break, and we have time to convert them over to the new mechanism.

    Not that I expect this to happen anytime soon -- it's too radical a change. But given how much device hell I've suffered and seen others suffer recently, I think it's necessary...

    IMHO,
    -->Zgwortz

    1. Re:Eliminate filesystem mapped devices by cnf · · Score: 1

      so what do i do on a kernel without module support ?

      i never enable module support on servers

  140. How about making it a Hard Real-Time OS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    by default.

  141. Already have VMs by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
    Isn't that the point of Linux being able to use virtual machines right now. You can have a "Master" kernel that mearly directs hardware, and all the work done by the virtual ones. Then you really can end one virtual one while the other is still running, and without rebooting the machine. Because the Master is only directing the virtual machines, there is already super strict security/limited usage in place. It wouldn't have to be strictly up-to-date because no processes should ever be able to actually access IT. That's all the virtual machines...


    I think this was even metioned here!

  142. ACPI Support by Heartz · · Score: 1

    ACPI Support built in for laptops! I use linux on my laptop a lot but when you're moving around alot, ACPI support is critical and much appreciated. It's just much too difficult to enable right now.

  143. MOSIX style clustering by charnov · · Score: 1

    True seamless, transparent, process migration with full distributed shared memory so that as more machines are added to a network, a cluster evolves.

    Then don't update the kernal for at least 18 motnhs and stabilize it.

    --
    [RIAA] says its concern is artists. That's true, in just the sense that a cattle rancher is concerned about its cattle.
  144. Finally a reason for DRM! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

    After all the BSP/IP system should always be enabled. This one techonlogy could convince even the most diehard /.er of the need for DRM. If we did have such a great and wonderful system, we'd want to ensure that it was ALWAYS operational when users were on /.! You'd need a /. signed kernel to prevent trolls from posting then "ducking" out of the concequences

  145. How about we get 2.6 working first! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
    Really, they need a number freeze first! How about they get 2.6 fixed up real good before they move on. After all, they may need to rewrite something that's horribly broken 9 months from now [hint: again!] Seriously, how bout they stick with 2.6 for 6-9 months and see how it actually performs in the real world. There's features people wanted in 2.6 because of the performance of 2.4, but 2.5 was already too far along to "add" them. That really shouldn't happen again. How will you really know what people NEED in 2.8 if you start on it NOW, before any one really USES 2.6!

    One sign of product maturity is to slow down releases. It's Open Source...there's no rush for market share here. As a matter of fact, rushing like this makes it LOOK like all the "pros" are moving on like kids with ADD to the next cool thing. That's not a good value to the "customers" linux is trying to win over.

    1. Re:How about we get 2.6 working first! by LnxAddct · · Score: 1

      Hey we are competing with a monopoly that releases broken and insecure operating systems and programs as a regular business practice, they tell you to patch them once they realize its broken or something needs to be changed or added. Linux is just trying to follow in the footsteps of a successful monopoly, that way we can be successful too. I mean, release something that we don't know works, and patch it when we find out its broken, or be forced to upgrade to the newest kernel. Worked for microsoft, it will work for us. Only one thing that might hold us back, its open source so those problems tend to found faster and fixed easier, without breaking other essentials of the OS. Just my 2 cents.

  146. Another feature! by t0ny · · Score: 1
    they are gonna to include ANOTHER browser! Booya!!!!1111 I can hardly wait!!! LiNux iz the bestest Os EVAR!!!!111

    Also, I need another text editer, because my current editer doesnt, um, do enough...

    I also need another way to look at a calender, becuz we need more choices. Lunix is all about choices. And freedom. And freedome to make choices. Like chioces about which OS we have to use, and not to be dominated by M$, and thier evil Windoze monopolie!!111

    PS. Windoze doesnt know how to cut and paste right, becuz they use CTRL-C/V instead of, um, the mouse thing. If I cant do it with the mouse, I dont want to know how to do it. The keybd suxars!!!111

    --

    Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

    1. Re:Another feature! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Awww...Someone doesn't know the difference between a kernel and a distribution =(

    2. Re:Another feature! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's kind of cute how misinformed and ignorant the dude is. Of course the post was totally lame, but also cute in a retarded kind of way is the way he writes his name, t0ny, so we all know he's really 1337. Anywho t0ny is just a troll who posts with a karma-bonus gained from a little whoring, check his post history and see some real stupid trolling. He can't even do that halfway decently.

  147. -march={686,athlonxp,etc...} by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    That kind of optimisation is already done in assembler segments and Makefiles. I've got an athlon so my kernel gets "cflags-$(CONFIG_MK7) += $(call check_gcc,-march=athlon,-march=i686 $(align)-functions=4)".


    I might note that you'll find this comment in the 2.6.0-test7 source tree:

    # Please note, that patches that add -march=athlon-xp and friends are pointless.

    # They make zero difference whatsosever to performance at this time.

  148. This is NOT easy by r6144 · · Score: 1
    If a new API is introduced, it is usually superior to the old one, often in ALL cases, so every maintained driver in the tree will probably get shifted to the new API. It is hard to make sure the old API keeps working when few drivers (many closed-source) use them and other parts of the kernel undergo heavy changes, especially when locking is involved.

    So, even if the API seems to be stable, many drivers WILL break if the kernel get some serious change. A lot of the bug reports about many libraries (such as Gtk) is about some application that used to work with 1.2.5 breaks with 1.2.7 for some hard-to-debug reason, sometimes because the application developer used the library in the unintended way. If such things happen in the kernel, it will be even harder to debug, and many systems will probably get as unstable as Windows because many drivers that don't work yet now breaks silently, rather than refusing to compile. Looking this way, the time and effort and code bloat in maintaining API compatibility seems to have gone to waste.

  149. What will be in 2.7 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What will be in Linux 2.7?

    The following start-up message "Copyright (C) 2004, The SCO Group, Inc."

    Please be aware, that the product should hence forth be known as "Unixware 8".

    Prepayment for an advance license is $699. The price will then rise to $1350. Unless you're IBM, in which case the prices are $1bn and $3bn respectively.

    Signed
    Darl, Chris, Blake, and David.

  150. Does that mean what I think it means? by BillX · · Score: 1

    hotplug CPU support? You could pry loose your CPU and put a new one in, without turning the computer off?

    While the mere thought of this has immense geek appeal, how would this actually be useful?

    --
    Caveat Emptor is not a business model.
    1. Re:Does that mean what I think it means? by Ella+the+Cat · · Score: 1

      I dunno, I didn't RTFA, but it would be nice if, should your CPU or motherboard blow up, or if you wanted to swap it out temporarily (with the power off!) to faultfind something, you could use another motherboard, not identical to the original, and everything would "just work". You might need more stuff on your drive "just in case" (especially if you swapped an AMD64 for a Via C3 mobo) but something that could cope with minor CPU differences might have its uses. Then some sort of hotplug-like framework might make sense. Mumble ...

    2. Re:Does that mean what I think it means? by Ophelan · · Score: 1

      This might have something to do with some hardware platforms (not your usual x86 ilk) that support multiple processors, and can cope with the loss of a processor rather well (gee, a cpu died...guess I'll just stop using that one), and by extension support removing said processor, putting a replacement in, and having the OS start using that processor again.

      This is useful in the "mission critical" market where you're dealing with machines with hot-swap everything (even CPUs!), redundant memory, and the like.

  151. Re:Mouse support (XFree86 configuration) by STREMF · · Score: 1
    Or how about the ability to assign a PS2 mouse and keyboard to one video card output and the USB keyboard and mouse to another video card output to give the ability to login one person on each interface grouping.
    If you're talking X11, I think you can already do this. (disclaimer: i've not actually tried this but I figure it should be a fairly straighforward extention of my knowledge of X configuration.) In your XF86Config file, you can define two keyboards, two mice, two screens (which use the two different vid cards) and when you start X11, just tell it which devices you want to use. These would be server options and startx can pass them through to your server.
    startx -- -screen screen0 -keyboard usbkbd -pointer usbmouse
    and
    startx -- -screen screen1 -keyboard atkbd -pointer ps2mouse
    I can't address the issue of the kernel's handling of virtual text terminals and device groupings, but if you are using xdm or some kind of graphical login that is running X anyway, I'm pretty sure the X-based device groupings above (with minor tweaks) would work just fine. Like I said, I haven't tried this before so the ideas could use a little refinement, but I thought I'd throw it out there, just in case it gave someone a good idea.
  152. Re:Mouse support (XFree86 configuration) by STREMF · · Score: 1
    As an afterthought, I realized that you probably need to use two different display numbers too, i.e.
    startx -- :0 -screen screen0 -keyboard usbkbd -pointer usbmouse
    and
    startx -- :1 -screen screen1 -keyboard atkbd -pointer ps2mouse
    see, i told you it might need some tweakin'
  153. Disk I/O scheduler and MB/sec quota per process by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Limiting the I/O for some processes like dd-based disk backups, swap, tar and locate would make the desktop use even more pleasing.

    I/O scheduling would reduce starving of other processes, while the I/O hogs saturate the interfaces. I guess quite a lot of users have only one disk with swap, system and data on the same disk.

  154. Q: how does work in practice? by tigersha · · Score: 1

    I know that I cannot rip out my CPU on my non-enterprise desktop, like all the other posters mentioned, but I am curious about this. I once saw a SUN dude at a show ripping out boards from his machines and pluggin them back and nothing changed on the screen as a demo.

    But how does this work in practice? RAM support I can imagine, IF you have ECC rAM. The RAM detects that a chip is blown but still keeps the memory OK by ECC support, similar to RAID. It signals the OS WHICH NEVER USES THAT RAM AGAIN before you replace it hot pluggable. This I can deal with, but, like RAID, it works by having redundant components (mirrisos/RAID5 extra disks) which keeps the data intact (but less reliable) until the replacement arrives.

    But how does this work in a CPU? The only way I can see this working is if there are redundant CPU's which execute the same instructions in parallel and compare the results. IBM mainframes do this. Is this is the case in fancy enterprise computers too?

    --
    The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
    1. Re:Q: how does work in practice? by nr · · Score: 1
      Well, as modern Sun servers use hardware/software partition (virtual servers) like in the mainframe world, you simply remove a CPU/memory board (these hotswap boards have 4 cpus and memory banks on em) by removing it from the partition and after that disabling and power it off.

      Please see Dynamic Reconfigration User Guide and Service Manual for details. ;-)

      Dynamic Reconfiguraion User Guide


      SunFire 12K/15K Service Manual

    2. Re:Q: how does work in practice? by tigersha · · Score: 1

      Ok, so there is a software step where you have to tell te operating system not to use the board anymore. Fair enough.

      Now two questions:
      a) Why would you want to do this? If the CPU is broken then the programs on that aprtition will be dead or erratic anyways.
      b) Can you simply plug out the board on the fly?

      --
      The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
    3. Re:Q: how does work in practice? by nr · · Score: 1

      Ok, I give it a try to answer the questions.

      a)

      If a CPU gets broken and the OS detects is, it will immediately take of CPU offline (tag it as not available). The same is true for memory banks, if a memory bank or DIMM get a hardware fault the OS will detect is and make it unavailable.

      Most modern applications consist of many different processes and threads which are scheduled by the scheduler on the CPU's, thats means the application wont be affected in case of a CPU failure (parts of it may be affected if it had code executing on that particular CPU exact that milliseconds the CPU broke).

      This is not only usefull in case of a hardware fault, but also for hardware expansion and upgrades as you easily can add more CPU, memory, I/O boards (Ethernet ports, Fibrechannel storage HBA cards, etc) under full operation without shuting down the server. Enabling 100% true 24/7 operation.

      b)

      Yes you can just plug it out. You can turn off the power to the boards from inside the OS with the commands poweroff/poweron , then its ok to plug it out.

      Not only highend servers E12K/E15K supports this functionality, but also the midrange servern in the SunFire family, from model 3800 and up. The boards are standardized. Exactly the same boards in a small 3800 server as in the E15K top model. This means that you can move psycial hardware resources between your servers if you have one server that need more CPU power for a particular task. I work in the pharmaceutical business and we have scientists who run alot of heavy simulations (genetic and molecular research, etc) on our servers, some of these tasks/jobs may run for weeks in a row without disruption.

  155. Packet Filter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "and improvements to Netfilter to bring it up to the the level of OpenBSD's Packet Filter."

    What would that mean? I'd like to know. I don't see anything constructive about this in the thread.

  156. Already done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is an panel applet called "Public file server" or somthing that comes with KDE (kdenetwork package I think). It's a webserver that listens on port 8001 by default.

  157. Hot-swappable kernel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Put some effort in making the kernel itself hot-swappable, so that applications/servers and duch don't have to go down when the kernel is upgraded. Easy? No. Valuable? Very.

    1. Re:Hot-swappable kernel by Second_Derivative · · Score: 1

      I think there's something called kexec in 2.6 which kinda does that. I haven't checked much though

  158. Driver support without recompiling. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about to make an interface for Graphics drivers to interface? So it would be no problem to install the newest Nvidia driver on the newest Linux kernel without I have to recompile the driver.

    It would be number ONE if I cold download an driver and install it like I does in Windows.

  159. Ping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The ping daemon is the thing in the krenel that responds to ICMP echo requests. Yes, this service which has almost no performance implications for anything runs in kernel space, not in user space. This is lame. All that crap should be yanked out of the kernel.

  160. What about kernel patching w/o reboots? by gpoul · · Score: 1

    If we'd have this feature we'd clearly be ahead in system uptimes, wouldn't we?

  161. Better driver structure. by forgoil · · Score: 1

    * Stable driver API (if the driver was released at x.y.0, it must work at x.y.999 as well)

    * Easy for 3rd parties to supply drivers, both binary and source (so hardware manufacturers can release their own drivers easily and not just for Redhat/SuSE with certain kernels).

    * More finetuning. I bet one could finetune the network stack better depending on what kind of speed your network is. Would be nice to have it automatic.

  162. Thts nice let your dsgn flaws |cat delete it 4 U by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Kmail ate my email because it's window had focus (because of a bug... I clicked on the other window!!!) and I started typing away... well Kmail and most unix programs have single letter commands

    Well.. The word I was typing was the equivilent of "select all, delete, yes"

    and gnome is even worse!

    and the command line has its own problems!

    So, I like being able to blame the computer manufacturer and the software people... and I hate it when they blame me for their design flaws.

    I like error messages.

    I don't like it when Linux eats my work without ANY error messages and requires guru knowledge just to make the work in the first place!

    Open Source is the future, and the Unix architecture has some very real problems. Read the Unix-Haters handbook.

    You might stop thinking that your just a n00b and think that the conventions etc are very dangerous.

  163. Feature I want by Uerige · · Score: 1

    I want the linux kernel package to be splitted into smaller chunks, like i386, ppc being only 'addons' to the kernel source. Also, many of the drivers could be splitted out to separate source files, as most people never need the whole tree. Someone who wants to use sound would download the sound patches, someone who needs 3d accelerated graphics would download agpgart/drm, etc.
    That way, kernel.org and it's mirrors would save gobs of bandwith, downloads would be way faster, and I would have more free space on my small harddisks.

  164. Automatic kernel configuration by metamatic · · Score: 1

    The biggest pain for me is manually configuring an optimal .config file.

    There are two related problems which explain why the kernel is this way. The first is that there's no hardware probing, and the second is that everything is therefore left switched on by default in case the hardware is there.

    Since KNOPPIX can automatically probe hardware, why can't they include code to probe the machine and construct a first pass at .config that contains only the hardware found? Then I could just skip through the various config screens, turn on stuff it missed, and be done.

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  165. The Linux Console Project by Sprinkels · · Score: 1
  166. Mandrake builds their distros on a dual Opteron by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    Er, next request?

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  167. ...but call it Plutonium? by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    Because now that the source is available, it'll have a half-life of millions of years?

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  168. Y'all should try SCO OpenServer 5 by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    After that, you'd be delighted by whatever form of Solaris or Linux you could get your hands on.

    Configuring it up requires not just a reboot, but generally also a kernel relink, and often several of them in succession, each getting you a step closer to the feature you originally wanted. More reboots than MS-Windows - feh! At least the thing's stable once you've eventually got it set up right, it's the one good thing I have to say about it.

    And all of the userland tools suck like a Kirby.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  169. If khttpd hasn't been ripped out again... by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    ...then it's definitely still optional and not selected by default. My last contact with it was the opinion "we've improved the kernel to the point where Apache can go this fast in userland".

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  170. Explicit overflow checking is built in to 2.6 by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    ...but in answer to the body of your post, I'll see you and raise you a Python and a Ruby.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  171. Function / Multimedia keys by Sits · · Score: 1

    This is purely a userspace issue. The events are passed through, it's just you have nothing bound to them so nothing happens. I have seen screenshots of GNOME 2.4 with a "bind multimedia keys" dialog and there are program like linEAK already.

  172. xrandr by Sits · · Score: 1

    You're right. I believe the utility is xrandr but you may need your X grahpics driver to support the X-render extensions for it to work.

  173. Get rid of /etc/mtab by kasperd · · Score: 1

    /etc/mtab has been obsolete for years, we just have to keep using it because there is no reasonable replacement. What we need is /proc/mounts to be improved enough to serve as replacement, or possibly a new /proc/mtab (and leave /proc/mounts unchanged for compatibility). What is most important to get added is the few extra fields needed by userspace, those should be set through the mount call and readable like all other mount options. Of course the userspace mount utility needs to be rewritten as well.

    --

    Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
  174. Sun eclipsed... by hughk · · Score: 1
    I work with HA systems too. My original background was VMS which could put Solaris to shame over uptime. However Digital lost out because they were too expensive for the performance. Now Sun is going the same way. Applications are becoming more distributed anyway so having a single large system isn't so important and failover tends to be transparent.

    The thing is that now everyone is concerned about cost. Big Iron running Solaris or anything else is rather too expensive now. The PC as an architecture has many faults, but the economies of scale mean that it will always be cheaper to produce. All the major elements from the processor through to the interface cards enjoy significant levels of competition which keeps prices low.

    Last point is support. Solaris is great, but it is hardly just one system (I have worked on and off with it since SunOS days). Linux support is variable, but I can elect to have something like RH's Enterprise level support all the way down through self support.

    However, it is the last option that is interesting. A large organisation can easily have people on staff that can hack kernels. Sometimes during application development (or deployment) you really need to dig down to source. You can easily do that with Linux because of the IP. With commercial licenses it is much more difficult, even if you have full source access. Sure you can get consultants from the vendor, but they usually know squat about your business/ap so can't really understand the problem and spend a lot of your money coming up with useless suggestions.

    --
    See my journal, I write things there