Slashdot Mirror
Linus on Linux in 1994
Vrallis writes "Ten years ago this month, Linux Journal christened their maiden issue with an interview with Linus Torvalds. It is definitely worth the read, and worth some reflection on just how far Linux has come in the last decade."
"In 10 years, there will be a linux oriented website capable of taking down the server this interview is hosted on."
...Beowulf Journal.
"What the hell is an aluminum falcon?"
Since then Linux has traveled around the sun ten times but its still in the same old place.
I guess that's what happens when you run servers on Linux, instead of stable, guaranteed solutions like Windows and Unixware
I'm curious if anyone remebers the Linus - Tanenbaum: polemics.
Of course Mach is a great idea: WIndows NT/2000, NeXT, Mac OS X, OpenDarwin, etc. but Linux is not dying...
You can defy gravity... for a short time
Bill Gates: "Linus who?"
-m
#
# Modus Ponens
#
"In 1994, Linux was mostly a toy OS. Really not much of anything more than a bootloader. A shell of an operating system."
"Ten years later... well, it's basically the same thing, but it's been ported to every damn computer out there!"
Dragging people kicking and screaming into reality since 1996.
Christening the maiden. Why does that sound so very naughty to me?
Check out the best P2P sharing website: MEDIACHEST.COM
Now I wasn't around for kernel 1.x, but I certainly have extensive experience with 2.4 and now 2.6. I even used distros back in the day that were based on 2.0 and 2.2. I cannot believe how far Linux has come - just take (for example) Gnome. I used to use the console alone because the two main WMs - Gnome and KDE - were klunky and not very usable. The text rendered horribly even at higher resolutions.
In addition, with the recently added hotplug functionality it is no longer necessary to know the exact specs for your hardware in some cases - it is automatically detected and supported.
It still has a ways to go though. Second-generation hardware is still not supported well enough yet - for example, ACPI doesn't work properly on my A7N8X Dlx. The system randomly crashes with it enabled and generates a ton of interrupt errors.
I am really quite impressed with the new functionality of the 2.6 series kernels. I think I'll go off and upgrade to 2.6.2 now...
Ads? What ads?
i think its funny that people put profanities in their code, but i think its even funnier that someone codded a program to look for swear words in code!
lol
spend money here
"and worth some reflection on just how far Linux has come in the last decade."
Well for one, penguin awareness across the globe is way up.
Linus: I actually have no good idea at all: I haven't really followed either the CD-ROM sales or any ftp statistics, so it's rather hard to say. I guesstimate a user base of about 50,000 active users: that may be way off-base, but it doesn't sound too unlikely. The c.o.l. newsgroup had about 80,000 readers according to the network statistics back before the split (and I haven't looked at the statistics since), and I saw a number like 10,000 CD-ROMs sold somewhere. Not all of those are active users, I'm sue, but that would put some kind of lower limit on the number.
Here is a article from 1994 from Linux Journal about the DECUS conference.
I also once enjoyed reading an account of the early days of Linux by his near friend. I just can't remember the link or the name of him.
"Until you do what you believe in, how do you know whether you believe in it or not?" -- Leo Tolstoy
Linus (rhymes with shyness) Torvalds (author of the Linux kernel, see box) traded e-mails with us for several days in January giving us his views on the future direction of Linux (rhymes with clinics) and his ongoing role in its development.
Linux Journal: Ken Thompson was once asked, if he had the chance to do it all again, what changes would he make in Unix. He said he would add an e to the creat system call.
How about you and Linux?
Linus: Well, Considering how well it has turned out, I really can't say something went wrong: I have done a few design mistakes, and most often those have required re-writing code (sometimes only a bit, sometimes large chunks) to correct for them, but that can't be avoided when you don't really know all the problems
If it's something I have problems with, it's usually the interface between user-level programs and the kernel: kernel-kernel relations I can fix easily in one place, but when I notice that the design of a system call is bad, changing that is rather harder, and mostly involves adding a new system call which has semantics that are the superset of the old and then leaving in a compatibility-hack so that the old calls still work. Ugly, and I avoid it unless it really has to be done.
Right now I'd actually prefer to change the semantics of the and write() system calls subtly, but the gains aren't really worth the trouble.
Linux Journal: The most consistent compliment that Linux receives is its stability on Intel PC computers. This is particularly true compared to ``real Unices'' that have been ported to the Intel platform.
What do you see that was done right in Linux that is causing problems for these other PC Unices?
Linus: There are probably a couple of reasons. One is simply the design, which is rather simple, and naturally suits the PC architecture rather well. That makes many things easier. I'd suspect that the other reason is due to rather stable drivers: PC hardware is truly horrendous in that there are lots of different manufacturers, and not all of them do things the same (or even according to specs).
That results in major problems for anybody who needs to write a driver that works on different systems, but in the case of linux this is at least partially solved by reasonably direct access to a large number of different machines. The development cycle of linux helps find these hardware problems: with many small incremental releases, it's much easier to find out exactly what piece of code breaks/fixes some hardware. Other distributions (commercial or the BSD 386-project which uses a different release schedule) have more problems in finding out why something doesn't work on a few machines even though it seems to work on all the others.
Linux Journal: Have you heard of any problems running Linux on the Pentium chip? Do you expect any?
Linus: I know from a number of reports that it works, and that the boot-up detection routines even identify the chip as a Pentium ("uname -a" will give "i586" with reasonably new kls, as I ignore Intel guidelines about the name). The problems are not likely to occur due to the actual processor itself, as much as with the surrounding hardware: with a Pentium chip, manufacturers are much more likely to use more exotic hardware controllers for better performance, and the drivers for them all won't necessarily exist for linux yet. So I've had a few reports of a Pentium PCI machine working fine, but that the kernel then doesn't recognize the SCSI hard disk, for example.
From a performance viewpoint, the current gcc compiler isn't able to do Pentium-specific optimizations, so sadly linux won't be able to take full advantage of the processor right now. I don't know when gcc will have Pentium-optimization support, but I expect it will come eventually (most of the logic for it should already be there, as gcc can already handle similar optimization problems for other complex processors).
One interesting thing is that the "bogo-mips" loop I use to calibrat
...is it really about the story or just trying to show how slash whips phpNuke's ass?
$30 Off All Plans: Use code TRIPLESAWBUCK
well, fuck aint as popular as it used to be, but there's crap and shit all over. It's spreading more rapidly than our holy penguin!
In times like these, it is helpful to remember that there have always been times like these. - Paul Harvey
The site admins just finish blowing out the candles, and slashdot blows out the server.
...
Our work is done here
"It's not your information. It's information about you" - John Ford, Vice President, Equifax
why does it matter that you work for the government and have multiple t3? get back to work and quit wasting my tax dollars.
notice the sudden increase of crap in 2.4.2 . that must be when they add the stolen unix code.
They asked Linus this question in 1994. And are we all using Amigas and DEC Alphas? Nope. I wonder what assumptions that we're making these days (x86_64 will take over the desktop, Microsoft will keep losing market share to Linux, Slashdot will eventually get redesigned, etc.) will end up being dead wrong, and funny when you look back. Maybe all of the above ...
It's quite amusing to consider how far Linus' operating system has come, how big it has become - to the point of challenging the multi-billion dollar corporations - when you think that at the start, Linus himself had said Linux wouldn't "be big and professional like gnu". Or to quote the original USENET post:
Heh."Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect" -- Linus Torval
It is not a problem with Linux per se. It is a problem with the culture. The Geeks spend too much time trying to show non-Geeks how uncool using Windows is, instead of trying to spread gospel, so to speak.
Today, the schism between these two classes is so great one views the other with hostility and mistrust. This is not how a society should evolve.
What should be done in the next ten years?
Nothing to see here
Bill Gates: "Destroy him, my scobots"
I was completely riveted by the portion of the interview that detailed the night on which Linus broke into SCO headquarters to steal their intellectual property.
It's nice to know that 10 years later, he probably still hasn't gone through that entire cache of toilet paper.
Due to the pressure that the open source world has placed on Microsoft, the Redmond based giant has announced it will now include a swear count feature to rival that of the Linux survey tool for source code statistics. Betatests of the software have revealed that the source code for Windows XP contains the word 'crap' appears on a scale ten times larger than that of the linux kernel. Most instances of the word crap however, are not located in the comments of the source code, but come mostly from names of most functions, procedures, and objects - thus giving an accurate description of their value.
Treasure? I doubt it. Linus is a great individual, and has my highest respect. But this is more than what HE accomplished. He has coordinated a great deal of it, but linux is no longer his. Linux is a community. Linus a world treasure? no. Linus is the the catalyst. The free software and open source movements were not his creation. Linus is the man that got things rolling faster. For that I thank him profusely.
Sigs? We don't need no stinking sigs!
Stop saying how bad windows is. Say how good Linux is.
I propose saying how free linux is and that that is what makes the big difference at the end of the day in how it is good as a system and in how it is good as a community.
...then I'll take some heed as to your notion of "appropriate" or not with respect to comments.
Linus et. al. have created an operating system I have used for over a decade and made over a million dollars using. If they find a little harmless humor or expressive freedom in swearing on occasion in the comments of their code, more power to them.
Saying "this implimentation if f*cked and needs fixed" is (in context) informative even if it is vulgar, and, quite frankly, it is their code, not Disney's (or $CO's).
i know that when i do coding, i try to make sure that not only the code itself is of high quality, but also that the comments are informative and useful -- not vulgar.
i just think that it's a childish thing to do.
It is no more childish than chiding someone who has put countless hours of hard work in for your benefit because their linguistic aesthetic differs from yours.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
No, no, you didn't finish the couplet...
"A new religion that'll bring Bill to his knees
Black Penguin, if you please..."
In article peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
/can/
>adam@flammulated.owlnet.rice.edu (Adam Justin Thornton) writes:
>> I'm frustrated because I'm too cheap to buy a decent OS for my 386 and GNU OS
>> isn't out yet and I have to run this silly little loader called MSDOS.
>
>Well, check out comp.os.minix. As the Arch-OS/2 fiend Peter Busser has informed
>me, there's a 386 kernel called linux under development in Finland. You need
>MINIX to bring it up, though.
Happily this isn't true any more (needing minix, that is). Linux
be used without minix, but it's not a tool for a user yet. Hacker-
material (ie I've got gcc, uemacs etc, but no real utils). Wait for
Hurd if you want something real. It's fun hacking it, though (but I'm
biased).
Linus "finger me for more info" Torvalds
(torvalds@kruuna.helsinki.fi)
---------
Hehe, I wonder if he is still waiting for Hurd to do something real.
Unfortunately, you're doing the same damned thing you're railing against:
The Geeks spend too much time trying to show non-Geeks how uncool using Windows is
[flame]Geeks are annoying. Most people only want to deal with them when something is broken. Most people don't like being preached to.[/flame]
(And yes, you can be both a UNIX guru and a non-geek.)
Understand that Linux is superior to Windows
By any sane/balanced person's standards, Linux is not categorically superior to Windows, sorry.
Linux may be simpler and speedier in many situations, but loses to Windows badly in the terms of: available software for the masses, gaming, video work, 3D design, drafting/CAD, audio work.
Simply put, Linux isn't the right thing for everyone, or perhaps even most people (for other than economical reasons). Recommending Linux to people who are better off using Windows or OS X is going to piss these people off and make them have a very unfavorable view of Linux, justified or not.
Stop saying how bad windows is
Quite some contradictory statements you've made there. You might want to rethink things.
Linux would benefit more if people would look at it as simply an OPERATING system, rather than a (religious) BELIEF system.
There's a reason why Linus has consistently distanced himself from the zealots; they don't represent his personal vision/goal of Linux.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
It's interesting to note that the interview conducted by the publisher of the first Linux Journal - Bob Young, who left his own mark of history of linux. Namely as a co-founder of RedHat.
Do you think your average user cares about this? Chances are he's running a pirated copy of Windows already, so he could care less whether or not it's free, and certainly won't bother to make the gratis/libre or beer/speech distinction since he simply doesn't care. What matters is the software support, and whether or not he can quickly and easily perform all of the tasks he's used to on Windows. What also matters is the hardware support, and the guarantee that the TV tuner card he just bought for $20 after rebate at Best Buy works properly with his operating system.
Of course, the issue with a lot of Linux evangelists is that they fail to realize how Windows is good enough for most people, that people are extremely stubborn, and will only change when forced to. My aunt Kathy doesn't care that Linux is made by a team of volunteers all around the world, or that Gnome and KDE offer many superior features to Windows. She cares that she can hop onto overpriced and under-featured America Online garbage and check her email. This is true of the majority of computer users, not the minority of dumb ones.
You can preach about free software all you want, but in the end, does it get the job done? And is it enough of an improvement to get people to give up what they've been using for years and learn an entirely new system?
There is absolutely no doubt that the Linux community has come a tremendous distance even in the last year or so. But we need to fucking work and work and work at improving the quality of the software, and drivers, if it's going to gain any mass-market acceptance. We're not done yet.
One of the most memorable parts of that evening was when my Linux NFS [Network File System] server died, to the point that the console seemed completely dead (the load of all those Doom WAD files obviously got to it). I was about to press reset when Linus stepped in and said he wanted to work out why it had crashed, so he could fix it. I then watched in complete amazement as Linus exploited a remote file truncation bug he knew about in the NFS server I was running which allowed him to peek into the proc filesystem on the apparently dead server and work out enough to find the bug. Up till then I had considered myself to be a pretty good programmer, and quite good at debugging system crashes, but that incident taught me that I would always be an also-ran who just isn't in the same league as people like Linus.
I think that Linus's achievements definitely make him a world treasure. But that's just my opinion, and you are most certainly entitled to your own.
My blog
And that end is in sight now, right guys?
Guys?
-Chris
[Linus] has coordinated a great deal of it, but linux is no longer his.
I disagree. He has done an outstanding job of managing the dev process for Linux. One of the most valuable things he does is to say "no": he won't let Linux bloat up needlessly and he won't accept badly-written patches. He has a vision for the kernel that has turned out to be excellent; he ignored the prevailing wisdom of the day that microkernel was the way to go, and that worked out (look where HURD is compared to Linux), he pushes at all times for simplicity (consider his interactivity boost, consider his plans to replace numeric IOCTLs with file-like semantics).
He's not perfect. His continuing refusal to accept kernel debugger hooks in the mainline kernel is silly (he has claimed that kernel debuggers are a crutch, for those who don't fully grok the kernel).
But without Linus, the Linux kernel would not be as amazingly great as it is today.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
I'm sorry, but I believe you're wrong. Part of what makes the kernel so great is Linus's personal tastes. Lots of people write code -- many of which write different implementations of the same thing. Linus ultimately still determines:
1) What code goes into the official kernel
2) What direction it takes
Stuff that Linus thinks sucks or isn't ready doesn't go in. Yes, Linus deferrs much of this to his "liutennants", and yes, there are other forks of the kernel tree, but most of them try to stay in line with Linus' tree. There are no true splits that have any momentum behind them, like in the BSD's. Every other popular tree is the Linus tree +/- some patches. And Linus, even if only as a figurehead, keeps this together because of the amount of respect the community has for him. He didn't write every line of code, but he defined, and still continues to define, what Linux is.
Lex orandi, lex credendi.
Linux has created two classes of people. Those who can, and those who can't
Linux didn't create those classes. I notice the same classes when it comes to many other things: fixing things around the house, working on cars, making things in a wood shop, etc.
It looks to me like there is a growing class of poeple out there that want everything handed to them on a silver platter sans any sense of understanding.
Today, the schism between these two classes is so great one views the other with hostility and mistrust.
Yeah, I see that too. But I think you misidentify the cause. And, once again, I don't think Linux has much to do with this.
Case in point: I was called by a Windows user the other day. He couldn't connect over the phone to a new AOL account. When I picked up the phone I could clearly hear just way too much noise on the line. I demonstrated how even a known good external modem would fail exactly the same way and told him that he had to have the phone line fixed. He treated me like I was lying to him, simply would not believe that there was anything wrong with the phone line and basically threw me out because I couldn't resolve his problem.
The source of his hostility and mistrust was not my preaching at him (I didn't) or any kind of complexity in Windows (the probelm was elsewhere). It was more likely situated in the fact that his problem couldn't be fixed right now, goddamnit, with no effort on his part! He didn't understand what was going on, I did, and why couldn't I just make the magic so it would work? Sorry, that's not how the universe works.
Understand that Linux is superior to Windows, but Linux users are not superior to Windows users.
Sorry, that's just not how I see it and I see a lot of both Windows and Linux users. Face it, there is a certain minimum knowledge about computers required to use Linux and, right now at least, it is higher than that required to use Windows. So, from that one particular standpoint - a basic knowledge of how computers work, the average Linux user is almost certainly superior to the average Windows user.
As another point in passing, I notice that Linux users are also the same people that fix things around the house, work on their own cars and have woodworking as a hobby. In general they understand that some things are possible only after acquiring a certain skillset and, God forbid!, actually put some effort into learning something new instead of just having everything handed to them on a silver platter.
Another argument is that the rumours (I didn't read the code myself) that flew around when the Windows code got out were that there was rampant profanity in it as well. This isn't to say that it's ok to do because Microsoft does it, just that it's probably nearly universal to swear in comments about broken hardware/software/whatever and the difficulties associated with working around it.
Honestly, I'd be worried about software that didn't have profanity in the comments. Mostly I'd assume the authors either trusted the documentation about everything (in which case it won't work) or just avoided completely doing the hard work (in which case it's a useless academic project) or perhaps just don't have a sense of humour (in which case I feel bad for them).