Slashdot Mirror
The Interactive Linux Kernel Map
Constantine writes "The Linux kernel is one of most complex open source projects. Even though there are a lot of books on the Linux kernel, it is still a difficult subject to comprehend. The interactive Linux kernel map gives you a top-down view of the kernel. You can see the most important layers, functionalities, modules, functions, and calls. Each function on the map is a link to its source code. The map is interactive. You can zoom in and drag around to see details."
Now the terrorists will know where to strike us!
I saw it in Time Magazine or Newsweek. A really complicated mixture of democratic and religious government bodies all interrelated.
Kernel developers have too much time on their hands...
Get back to work ;)
After looking at all that, am I the only one who is sorta taken by how complicated it is, and under the impression I am looking at the various complications of the Borg collective Consciousness?
(Before anyone makes the Bill Gates of Borg jokes, I have friends who say that really Microsoft is much more like the Jem'Hadar than the Borg. They don't really assimilate, they just show up with guns and take what they want.
I've worked on several different OS's and learned their internals intimately. Although I have used Linux a moderate amount I have no such understanding of the internal Linux architecture, so this slashdot post caught my interest. However, I RTFA, such as it is, but come away only with the belief that this is a further effort to make the OS look much more obscure and cryptic than any OS actually is. If anyone really learns much about the Linux OS from this thing I would be amazed.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Someone has to ask it, and I have to admit I'm more curious about it than this. I want to see something similar to this for Windows or OS X, to compare with. Not down to the code level. (I did go trolling around in the code reading some comments, interesting stuff) but at least to see the difference in how things are laid out by comparison.
Surely there are a few that have poked around in those two systems enough to give us a rough fleshing out of the internal structure?
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Now I would like to compare that with one of the BSDs. The BSD folks should create a similar map so we all could be amazed.
I assume that this isn't manually built. How is it generated? Is the software available for use with other programs?
The overall user experience sucks at best. Go ahead and flame me.
Allright I will. I'm surprised you people still exist and even more surprised you still dare posting such nonsense on /. .
The user experience of the desktop-geared distributions matches OS X and even transcends it a lot of times.
And saying it's hard to install makes no sense. OS X is preinstalled and can only be installed on a very, very limited number of computers. You can't just compare them. OS X is not 'better' at installing, it's just out of category. And Linux still does a lot better than Windows in terms of hardware compatibility.
As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields.
Seems to be variable. I had absolutely no problems installing FC6, 7 and Fedora 8 and 9. Just pop the CD in and go. I'm not saying these install problems don't exist, I've just never seen them.
How dare you be so modest!! You conceited bastard!!
re: the Gnome criticism: I'd argue that OSX is a few years behind Gnome in usability.. that Dock, for example, is a prime example of the interface flaws throughout OSX. And don't even get me started on Finder...
Makes you wonder if anybody at Apple even knows who Tog is anymore.
And speaking of "many useless apps" have you bothered to use OSX? Junk everywhere. It all depends on what you use, need and like.
Get back to your tower of ignorance.
Your post is rather contradictory. You say the kernel is rock solid, yet then say you have video, audio and lock-up issues, which would actually most likely be caused by kernel issues. I doubt the problems really existed, as you have been purposefully scant on details. Also, I have a few different cards from different iterations of the Sound Blaster generations and they are some of the most stable and functional sound cards under Linux, so I think this is just an oversight of your ignorance.
Gnome isn't designed to be OS X-like. It is designed to be functional, and I feel it excels at this. Want an OS X-like desktop environment? Go design one.
Can't set up your desktop to span multiple monitors using many of the GUI tools available, and feel the developers should change the default install to reflect your inabilities? Boo-hoo.
Any sufficiently complicated plate of spaghetti is morally equivalent to any other.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Please tell us.
I am sure you didn't mean that as a sneaky way to accuse the site of piracy without bothering to check your facts.
As I am sure you know a lot of linux books have been put online with the permission of their authors. And most have seen their sales increase as a result. So please let us know if this is the case here. Thank you.
The overall user experience sucks at best. Go ahead and flame me.
Flame you because...what, you're spouting a lot of unfocused hyperbolic blanket statements, or because you're asking to be flamed?
Last week's installs left a lot to be desired. We started with Fedora core 9 and and had all sorts of video and lock up problems. We abandoned it after three days of trying. The install disk wouldn't even run without a resolution parameter.
Without much in the way of context or so much as a mention of why you chose Fedora to begin with, I'm going to believe you had some free time to futz about with random distros and chose Fedora because it's one of the more popular ones. At this point, instead of messing around with these mysterious unsubstantiated video and lock-up issue, why not just try a different one on day one?
We moved to Ubuntu. Much better but Gnome is 5 years behind OS/X (Forget about KDE 4).
Behind OS/X...how? And why the comparison to OS/X in the first place? If you're expecting one thing and you load up something else, it's fairly ridiculous to assert that B sucks because it's not exactly like A. Really, what were you expecting, and more importantly, why?
Sound still is an issue with Sound Blaster but at least we have something much more usable than Fedora.
So it's better but there's still some undefined 'issue' with your sound card. Thanks for letting anyone know what that issue is so they might help you or attempt a fix if it's an over-arching flaw with some aspect of the distro or one of the packages contained therein.
I wish the effort is spent on making installs a breeze. The desktop panels do not span multiple monitors
Awesome! Finally! Look, this is *exactly* what's needed: worthwhile feedback! Now tell people working on Ubuntu what you found challenging about the install process, and also let them know that easy-to-configure association between desktop panels and multiple displays would be a positive boon in your opinion (maybe to the point of suggesting what would, in your opinion, make sense in regards to setting this up).
and the default install still ships with many useless apps.
...and back to unhelpful, non-pointed kvetching. What you mean is useless to you, and yet you don't say what, why, or what would be more useful for these unstated purposes of selecting a Linux-based desktop-centric distro in the first place. But say, maybe you're just not seasoned. Maybe you don't know how to talk about stuff and your frustration is rooted in that.
We use Linux for all of our production JBOSS servers and it has been absolutely wonderful. One day (I hope) the user experience will be as good. Windows and Mac OS/X have nothing to fear on the desktop for now.
On second thought, looks like you've got some idea of what you're doing.
Really: li'l help? Seriously, I get your frustration, and you're allowed to complain, but for cryin' out loud, *be specific* so that your complaints are useful and not easily taken as cranky bitching. After all, these things don't fix themselves.
No, you don't "wonder". You assume that it's illegal to share, and apparently you want the rest of us to do so as well. If you would have been curious, you could easily have clicked on the books and found out that they are all free to share, like information should be.
c++;
because Fedora 9 is the only linux distro and it isn't unstable or anything
May fortune shine on these efforts to flatten out the learning curve.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
this and this is the real reference for the kernal.
We use Linux for all of our production JBOSS servers and it has been absolutely wonderful. One day (I hope) the user experience will be as good. Windows and Mac OS/X have nothing to fear on the desktop for now.
OK...so stability is a disadvantage somehow. Fine.
Still you are wrong. Notice how many Apple-brained idio..syncratic people are shifting from trashing Windows to trashing Linux? Proof positive that Linux is winning.
While on your side in your flame, I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one. Ignoring Vista for one minute with its compulsory driver signing, etc., XP has a remarkably good support for hardware because...all mass-market vendors will necessarily write drivers for Windows, but not for Linux. I've been using Linux for 10+ years, since the days when Slackware was the most "user-friendly", and until Ubuntu 8.04, I was still wrapping Windows wireless drivers in ndiswrapper, my laptop sound refused to work in spite of all the forum workarounds and my cheap Chinese-made webcam was flat out not recognized. And this was on a stock $500 Toshiba laptop. Most of those are now solved, but it was never an issue with XP.
Of course, this says nothing about XP being "superior" to Linux from a technology point of view -- just that hardware vendors are going to release win drivers and might release linux drivers.
An old-timer with old-timey ideas.
After looking at all that, am I the only one who is sorta taken by how complicated it is, and under the impression I am looking at the various complications of a four barrel carburetor?
(Before anyone makes the "Big Three" jokes, I have friends who say that really GM/DC/Ford are much more like the Hells Angels than a pack of Greasers. They don't really sit around at Arnold's diner, they just show up with guns and take what they want.
Fixed... I think. We still use car analogies here at Slashdot, right??
And saying it's hard to install makes no sense. OS X is preinstalled and can only be installed on a very, very limited number of computers. You can't just compare them. OS X is not 'better' at installing, it's just out of category.
Well, if it makes you feel any better then you could say Linux doesn't compete in the category 100% of the people wants - computers with operating systems. Of course that'd just start a small flamewar over how Linux took only two clicks to install and how their grandmother could do it. And now Linux has a few preinstalled variations, not much more hardware choice than Macs on that though, but isn't it really convienient to define it out like that? "Easiest to install except the operating systems that don't need installation"? Isn't that something like saying "Cheapest car maintenance except the cars that don't need maintenance"? Is there any reason whatsoever having to install it yourself should be considered a feature? Being easy certainly reduces the drawback, but I can't see the advantage.
And Linux still does a lot better than Windows in terms of hardware compatibility.
Show me a piece of hardware that doesn't work on Windows, and it's some obscure thing that once had a Windows driver but the producer stopped making drivers for years ago. I can tell you of plenty current hardware that doesn't work right on Linux though. You can start by getting drivers for my parent's printer or fix that my firewire drive falls asleep (it's a Linux driver issue, yes). And last I tried installing it on my Toshiba laptop it wouldn't even boot the CD...
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I have two computers at home, even if I wanted to install OS X on them it would not work and it would probably be illegal, I have no intention to buy another computer because these are rather new machines. Oh, and I don't want to use Windows either, plus it's way too expensive and bloated (Vista). Linux and BSD work just fine on my machines...
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
I use F9 on a daily basis, and it's a pretty decent (though not great) distro.
XP has a remarkably good support for x86 hardware
Fixed that for you.
Linux run on a LOT more devices than Windows can. Microsoft's a lot like Apple that way. The limited subset of computers designed for their OS are well-supported, but forget about running the OS on any exotic hardware.
Look how long it took them to get it running on the OLPC.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
My operating systems course involved hacking the freebsd kernel. This would have come very handy then though there are differences between freebsd and linux. Is there a similar map for freebsd?
If you're trying to suggest a product to someone, then when people talk about 'ease of installation' they're talking about how much work someone has to put in to get it up and running. If there's no installation, there's no work and that's a big plus.
Biggest annoyance for me on the linux desktop is the way Nautilus doesn't support windows style UNC paths or network mounts. If a colleague sends me a link to a file on our shared drive ('s:\filename.txt') I have to translate that into a pathname that nautilus understands. That, and there's no Mozy client.
Can you point to some of these NDA's you speak of? Because, I have to wonder how you can have an NDA on something that anyone can go to your website and download the source code for.
Anthony Papillion
Advanced Data Concepts, Inc.
"Quality Custom Software and IT Services"
For a person that learns visually, a map like this is biggest gift any opensource community has given me. If only everything could have a map, then atleast people can explore and learn at their own pace in a much easier way.
modules is responsible for sound system in linux to be so fucked up. I've literally given up trying to get sound in linux.. I so loathe ALSA.. :(
I don't know of any examples, but it isn't unheard of where Linux developers sign an NDA with a company to get documentation in order to write an open driver. The company allows the code to be disclosed, but not the documents that were used to develop the code.
Thank you!
I have been using Gnome/Linux as my primary and only operating system on my servers and laptops since early 2003. I have used and moved on one laptop a year. And every linux install has been easier than earlier
Back then it took me 10 hours to install and configure everything from modems to wireless to printers. Today it takes me 30 minutes to do the same.
Today with opensuse, everything works out of the box and net some packages are auto downloaded by yast. bluetooth, wifi, sprint aircard graphics, printers, scanners vpn everything works without getting into the terminal.
Show me a piece of hardware that doesn't work on Windows, and it's some obscure thing that once had a Windows driver but the producer stopped making drivers for years ago.
My Canon CanoScan 650U flatbed scanner is about 6 years old and probably good for another 20 given how much I use it. Not supported now or (presumably) ever in Vista. Supported perfectly (and probably indefinitely) in Linux.
I wouldn't rate this as obscure, and it's not one of those things that you might as well replace because the latest models are so much cheaper and better.
Biggest annoyance for me on the linux desktop is the way Nautilus doesn't support windows style UNC paths or network mounts. If a colleague sends me a link to a file on our shared drive ('s:\filename.txt') I have to translate that into a pathname that nautilus understands. That, and there's no Mozy client.
Well that's just a bad way of transferring file links. There is no guarantee that you have mounted the network drive in Windows on the same drive-letter. Still, Nautilus is open source. So fix it yourself/Ask the geeky kid next door to fix it.
As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields.
And saying it's hard to install makes no sense. OS X is preinstalled and can only be installed on a very, very limited number of computers. You can't just compare them. OS X is not 'better' at installing, it's just out of category.
Well, if it makes you feel any better then you could say Linux doesn't compete in the category 100% of the people wants - computers with operating systems. Of course that'd just start a small flamewar over how Linux took only two clicks to install and how their grandmother could do it. And now Linux has a few preinstalled variations, not much more hardware choice than Macs on that though, but isn't it really convienient to define it out like that? "Easiest to install except the operating systems that don't need installation"? Isn't that something like saying "Cheapest car maintenance except the cars that don't need maintenance"? Is there any reason whatsoever having to install it yourself should be considered a feature? Being easy certainly reduces the drawback, but I can't see the advantage.
Linux is just not in the position to be preinstalled on computers. But if you want to play it that way: when I installed Linux on the laptop of my friend (a brand new laptop, every piece of hardware works) he told me what he needed. That means that the Linux OS on his computer was installed exactly to his needs. That's a lot better than Mac does.
And I prefer a car that needs a little bit of maintenance than a car that needs to be locked and shipped back to the car factory for maintenance.
And Linux still does a lot better than Windows in terms of hardware compatibility.
Show me a piece of hardware that doesn't work on Windows, and it's some obscure thing that once had a Windows driver but the producer stopped making drivers for years ago. I can tell you of plenty current hardware that doesn't work right on Linux though. You can start by getting drivers for my parent's printer or fix that my firewire drive falls asleep (it's a Linux driver issue, yes). And last I tried installing it on my Toshiba laptop it wouldn't even boot the CD...
Okay I'll show you some hardware:
Infiniband
Every single thing in this PowerPC computer I have here
My Play Station Portable (MIPS architecture)
Linux works perfectly with any of these but Windows can't even try. Windows is just like Mac quite good in it's limited subset. But Linux supports more hardware than any other OS on the planet.
And that it won't boot is a fatal flaw in your BIOS and has absolutely nothing to do with Linux. Don't blame everything on it.
As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields.
Is this a value judjment for Linux? Probably any map for the US government would be 100 times more complicated than Linux or your Iranian government, because the US goverment has been doingg it longer. And this is fact, not a value judjment either.
So, where's the function for "global desktop domination through illegal monopolistic practices"?
The overall user experience sucks at best. Go ahead and flame me. Last week's installs left a lot to be desired. We started with Fedora core 9 and and had all sorts of video and lock up problems. We abandoned it after three days of trying. The install disk wouldn't even run without a resolution parameter.
Perhaps you know this already, but Fedora is a distro that caters to Linux hobbyists who know what they're doing. To a certain extent, you were asking for some extra work when you chose it.
Sorry to hear about your lockup issues. They are probably driver related, but they will be cleared up eventually. For example, I once had a Broadcom Wireless card that didn't work at all. After using NDisWrapper, the card worked for a while but would lock up the system. One day a kernel update came along and my card was supported fully on initial OS install, with no extra work and no lockups.
As another example of success, I installed Ubuntu Hardy 64-bit on my Macbook. At first install, the system would not suspend properly and when it woke up it exhibited wierd behavior. Happily for me, yesterday I ran an update that included a kernel patch, and my problem just disappeared. I couldn't be more thrilled.
If you're having issues your should file a bug report to the appropriate developer team and hope for the best. Eventually your problem will be resolved; You're not the only one experiencing your issue.
We moved to Ubuntu.
That's more like it. It seems like Ubuntu's more likely to fit your requirements (ie that it just works with minimum hassle)
Much better but Gnome is 5 years behind OS/X (Forget about KDE 4).
You have a right to your opinion, but I disagree. I like Gnome. Are you refering to eye candy? Turn on Compiz using System->Preferences->Appearance.
Why should I forget KDE4, effectively disregarding countless man-hours of development for no stated reason?
Sound still is an issue with Sound Blaster
Since you're comparing Linux so much about OSX, I'm gonna assume that you may be installing it on a Mac. Apple applies a DSP (digital sound processor) to their sound before outputting it to the speakers. Perhaps to compensate you should add a DSP to ubuntu
but at least we have something much more usable than Fedora. I wish the effort is spent on making installs a breeze. default install still ships with many useless apps.
I agree. Usability is important. Then again, you did pick a hobbyist distro. Also, you can remove any app you don't use, or move on to a slimmer distro.
We use Linux for all of our production JBOSS servers and it has been absolutely wonderful. One day (I hope) the user experience will be as good.
Glad to hear it.
Dangerous, sexy, turing complete: Femme Bots
Show me a piece of hardware that doesn't work on Windows
You've never needed to use XP 64bit then have you? I can point to 20 things in this room that flat out failed to work on XP 64bit. Film and flatbed scanners, Network printers, Desktop printers, external DVD-RW drives are just a few of the issues i've had with XP 64. ALL OF THEESE WORK PERFECTLY IN LINUX 32 and 64bit, and most of these work fine with OS X. Windows is obsolete. XP 64 lost the first round and Vista lost the whole bloody match.
Nonsense? I can't compare Ubuntu or Fedora to OS X because I don't have enough experience with OS X. But if you compare Ubuntu to Windows, including Vista, then it's obvious the Linux experience sucks.
Don't get me wrong, I install and manage Linux servers, I'm certainly not fond of Windows 2003 and I think Linux servers are easier to maintain, but on the general desktop Linux is miles away from Windows. It can, kind of, do the job after a lot of tweaking, it can be "fun" for someone who sees computers as a hobby, but for someone who view a computer as a toaster, which is the majority of people, Linux is simply not usable for now on the average desktop (and after all those years, I've become kind of skeptical about its future).
Seriously? I would have expected a reply because I told the truth about OS X, but I never expected anyone to think Vista had a better desktop experience than Linux. The times I had to work on a Vista box felt like torture.
As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields.
Tue 7/01/2008 5:50 pm. Well I had been mildly wondering what exactly was going on with the Linux times() call (http://home.att.net/~owen_labs/rant10.htm#ticktimes) -- since the "documentation" is fanciful -- and this weird-looking chart was actually useful for this. It took about 10-20 minutes, but eventually I found do_timer() doing "jiffies_65 += ticks" and sys_times() doing "return (long) jiffies_64_to_clock_t(get_jiffies_64())". That's further than I ever got with a book, so Yay Chart! -- anonymous coward....