Slashdot Mirror


According to Linus, Linux Is "Bloated"

mjasay writes "Linus Torvalds, founder of the Linux kernel, made a somewhat surprising comment at LinuxCon in Portland, Ore., on Monday: 'Linux is bloated.' While the open-source community has long pointed the finger at Microsoft's Windows as bloated, it appears that with success has come added heft, heft that makes Linux 'huge and scary now,' according to Torvalds." TuxRadar provides a small capsule of his remarks as well, as does The Register.

17 of 639 comments (clear)

  1. Problem by sopssa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Okay, so the summary of this is that you expect that 12 per cent to be back to where it should be next year, and you expect someone else to come up with a plan to do it," joked Bottomley. "That's open source."

    That is also the problem. Everyone adds pieces and eventually it starts to become a mess. Then someone else should fix it.

    1. Re:Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's all software.

    2. Re:Problem by Galactic+Dominator · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Properly managed opensource projects deal with this appropriately, some do not.

      Properly managed proprietary projects deal with this appropriately, some do not.

      --
      brandelf -t FreeBSD /brain
    3. Re:Problem by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Keeping the bloat out is not just about rejecting patches, it's about encouraging code reuse. In the BSD kernels, for example, the WiFi drivers are very small and all use the same code for everything that is not hardware-specific. I believe this is the case in Linux now, but for a while Intel had their own (almost) complete WiFi stack for their drivers and no one else used any of that code. This is a pretty endemic problem in Linux. It gets even worse when you stray a little way from x86, and find that everyone is implementing their own, incompatible, code for platform-specific features without realising that a lot of it ought to be shared everywhere above the very lowest layer.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:Problem by bostei2008 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree.

      The people hating messes are the developers which have to look at this day by day. Cleaning up code is never something managers care about - its always driven by developers with a sense for order and simplicity.

      That means that Open Source software has a higher chance of getting cleaned up than propietary software, because there you have a higher percentage of truly motivated developers and no managers to bug them. Sigh...

    5. Re:Problem by jhol13 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Constant changes, i.e. lack of stable KBI (kernel binary interface) does not help.

      Eventually keeping your incompatible stack is easier than keeping up-to-date with latest and "greatest", especially if you happen to test your code.

    6. Re:Problem by oiron · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It gets done because ultimately somebody says "Fuck this, I can't work on this bloated codebase any longer. We're refactoring, guys!"

      Then, if the old lead dev / maintainer / admin doesn't like it, a fork happens...

      Projects where this has happened before: The kernel itself, several times (as well as various subsystems, again several times), X (XFree to XOrg), KDE (2-3, 3-4), Amarok (1.x to 2.x), SodiPodi -> Inkscape, Firefox from 2 to 3... These are off the top of my mind, of course - there are lots more.

      Of course, there are some cases where this process has failed. I don't think the failure rate is any higher (or lower) than proprietary projects, though...

      The incentives are different, but they exist, nevertheless...

    7. Re:Problem by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Cleaning up code is never something managers care about

      Most managers care a LOT about cleaning up code. It's a waste of time in their eyes and most will write you up for wasting time if they discover that you are doing it.

      They wanted it done last week, cleaning up code misses deadlines and is a waste of time as far as management is concerned.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    8. Re:Problem by DrgnDancer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The same way people in raid guild do what they're supposed to in raids even though it's only a game and raid officers can't do anything to you really; or members of Civil Air Patrol follow military customs and courtesies toward their officers despite those officers having no actual UCMJ authority; or people in SCA listen to the nobles of their "Baronies" despite those people not having any real world authority. When you join a group or a project, you agree to abide by the rules of the group or project. If you eventually find that you can't, you generally either leave or are forced out. if the project lead on a properly managed project asks you to do some boring grunt work, you either do it or find a new project and someone else will be asked to do the work.

      If the project is generally fun or personally beneficial for you to work on, you'll do the grunt tasks you're asked to do, because otherwise you'll eventually be off the project. If the project wants to keep it's user base (and most do) it'll fix as many problems as it can to keep the users happy.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
  2. So, Andrew Tannenbaum by siddesu · · Score: 5, Funny

    is finally having the last laugh? /dnrtfa

  3. Linux is bloated... by jarocho · · Score: 5, Funny

    However, Minix continues to maintain its girlish figure.

    1. Re:Linux is bloated... by Chemisor · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's easy to maintain your girlish figure when you are embalmed.

  4. A Few More Bits of His Talk by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I can't believe I'm relying on The Register for this but they have a few more quotes from him:

    Uh, I'd love to say we have a plan. I mean, sometimes it's a bit sad that we are definitely not the streamlined, small, hyper-efficient kernel that I envisioned 15 years ago...The kernel is huge and bloated, and our icache footprint is scary. I mean, there is no question about that. And whenever we add a new feature, it only gets worse.

    And also:

    He maintains, however, that stability is not a problem. "I think we've been pretty stable," he said. "We are finding the bugs as fast as we're adding them -- even though we're adding more code." Bottomley took this to mean that Torvalds views that the current level of integration acceptable under those terms. But Mr. Linux corrected him. "No. I'm not saying that," Torvalds answered. "Acceptable and avoidable are two different things. It's unacceptable but it's also probably unavoidable."

    I think that's very important to note. His quote by itself is very self-loathing but to add that tit's unavoidable really says a lot. You want to be popular? You have to satisfy more people and in doing so you become more bloated. He does maintain that Linux remains stable and that's usually the biggest problem I have with bloat. It decreases stability. I don't think there's any reason to get excited about level headed rational and reflection.

    --
    My work here is dung.
  5. Specialist's bloat is not user's bloat by Dystopian+Rebel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What "bloat" in software means to LT as the high priest of the kernel and what bloat means to me as a user are two different things.

    To a user, bloat means awkward, slow, inefficient, and needlessly large (if my storage space or bandwidth is limited). But these are all *perceived*. I don't perceive Linux to be bloated.

    In fact, I find *NIX with almost any window manager to be the most efficient computer OS I have ever used. Linux is the best of them, despite being a clone of the UNIX userland.

    If an OS can boot from a floppy or small USB key and be totally usable, it is certainly not bloatware. Rewrite the Linux userland in MONO or Java and then we'll talk about bloat.

    --
    Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
  6. Ah, the ever quotable Linus. by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is like the salesman's nightmare, where you take the guy from engineering to visit the customer. Things are going great, the engineer can answer all the customer's questions.

    Then you realize, *the stupid bastard is answering the questions honestly*.

    Honesty is a basic requirement to be a halfway decent engineer. Persistent and incurable dissatisfaction with how you did the last job is another. Even if you *know* you did a great job, deep inside part of you knows you could have done it *better*.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  7. Re:Are too many added drivers really the cause? by oiron · · Score: 5, Informative

    Drivers live in the kernel tree. They don't necessarily have to be built into the kernel... Take a look at what the M key does in make menuconfig sometime...

  8. Re:Microkernels. Hmm... by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yes.

    QNX compared to a hand tuned embedded linux install is in fact Slow.

    QNX on the other hand is a faster deploy time, you dont have to spend time wrapping your own embedded distro for your product, just pay the QNX license fee and you're off.

    Back 4 years ago I proved that by making my own linux install for a company product and kicked out the QNX system. It ran far faster, but they did not want to pay to support the custom OS so we stuck with QNX, and they already paid for the QNX licensing.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.