Slashdot Mirror


Linux 2.6.34 Released

diegocg writes "Linux 2.6.34 has been released. This version adds two new filesystem, the distributed filesystem Ceph and LogFS, a filesystem for flash devices. Other features are a driver for almost-native KVM network performance, the VMware balloon driver, the 'kprobes jump' optimization for dynamic probes, new perf features (the 'perf lock' tool, cross-platform analysis support), several Btrfs improvements, RCU lockdep, Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (RFC 5082) and private VLAN proxy arp (RFC 3069) support, asynchronous suspend/resume, several new drivers and many other small improvements. See the full changelog here."

268 comments

  1. a filesystem for flash devices by deathcow · · Score: 5, Funny

    > a filesystem for flash devices

    here we go again, unless we stop supporting flash, Apple has refused to distribute dual-boot Linux enabled iPads

    1. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Hal_Porter · · Score: 0, Troll

      Here we go again, unless we stop supporting the Spanish Republicans Herr Hitler has threatened to invade Poland.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    2. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by hellop2 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Is that a joke?

      --
      How many more years will slashdot have an off-by-one error on your Score in your profile?
    3. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      No. Flash support is in Linux and Apple indeed refuses to distribute dual-boot Linux enabled iPads.

    4. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by jo_ham · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm more concerned that this is a slashvertisment for Linux.

      Slashdot used to be about news for nerds, stuff that mattered!

      How far it has fallen.

    5. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      If Linux isn't for nerds then who is it for? House fraus whose TV's are on the blink? Unrelenting overlords of evil corporate empires? Has-been movie starts and their hippie dippie 60 something rockstar friends? Well, maybe all of them, but especially nerds.

    6. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      One of the new features of 2.6.34 kernel is Woooooosh owerflow protection

    7. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If Linux isn't for nerds then who is it for? House fraus whose TV's are on the blink? Unrelenting overlords of evil corporate empires? Has-been movie starts and their hippie dippie 60 something rockstar friends? Well, maybe all of them, but especially nerds.

      Woooosh

      (that was the sound of the joke flying over your head)

    8. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, it's a kdawson post - he's notorious for posting Slashvertisements for the latest brand of rip off Snake Oil. I mean, "Linux", come on, what's that supposed to be? Some shoddy knock off of BSD/MacOS Unix? I bet it's just the periscope of a Microsoft patent submarine.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    9. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Jesus_666 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Actually, Linux is a German detergent brand. I have no idea why we should care about detergent all of a sudden.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    10. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am pretty sure they are talking about Flash memory devices...like a flash drive and NOT Adobe Flash...are people really this easily confused?

    11. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Whoosh indeed.

      OK, so I'm a dumbass ... I claim "no coffee" and "I just had to scoop the cat box" as reasons my brain wasn't functioning on a full 3 1/2 cylinders this morning.

    12. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, pull up your panties Gina.

    13. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by FalcDot · · Score: 1

      As long as it's not a flashvertisement...

    14. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Kilrah_il · · Score: 1

      Slightly OT:
      How many 'O' do you have in a whoosh? Every one here wrote a different amount, starting with 6 and going all the way down to 2. Is it a function of how whoosh-worthy the OP was (which should get WrongSizeGlass at least 6-7 'O's ([sorry, but you know it's true]), or is there some other factor taken into account?

      --
      Whenever in an argument, remember this.
    15. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by NekSnappa · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Due to the Doppler effect, the number of o's in the word "Whoosh (nominal spelling)" depends on the height above the observers head that the joke passed.

      --
      I want to shoot the messenger!
    16. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Tarlus · · Score: 1, Informative

      I'm more concerned that this is a slashvertisment for Linux. Slashdot used to be about news for nerds, stuff that mattered! How far it has fallen.

      Um. Slashdot has been reporting new updates to the Linux kernel since almost day one.

      --
      /* No Comment */
    17. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by mldi · · Score: 1

      I am pretty sure they are talking about Flash memory devices...like a flash drive and NOT Adobe Flash...are people really this easily confused?

      Only you are.

      --
      If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.
    18. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Just because you don't know what kind of detergent your mother uses to clean your clothes doesn't mean everybody can get their mother to do their laundry...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    19. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure I deserved every "O" I got based on how badly I missed the joke

    20. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Wow. A +X, Funny thread about how nobody knows Linux and the detergent joke gets downmodded as a Troll. Apparently some people have heard that one once too often...

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    21. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a new kernel mod, called the meta-ICWSM. Doesn't seem to work too well.

    22. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Um. Whoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh.

    23. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by damien_kane · · Score: 1

      How many 'O' do you have in a whoosh?

      42.

      ...what?

      or is there some other factor taken into account?

      Of course there is, the Ultimate factor.

    24. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by javiercero · · Score: 0

      You know that "flash" refers to the memory technology kind, not the adobe persuasion one.

    25. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could tell he was kidding when he said Flash support in Linux...

    26. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by VTI9600 · · Score: 1

      Freakin' great! Parent got +5 Funny and I got -1 "Moderator has no sense of humor" for the comment I typed on my Ubuntu 9.10 desktop system. People need to lighten up and stop having knee-jerk reactions to stuff like this.

    27. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by instagib · · Score: 1

      I agree. The joke is flying pretty slowly by now.

    28. Re:a filesystem for flash devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whooossshhhhh!

  2. KVM by VTI9600 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Other features are a driver for almost-native KVM network performance

    KVM is fantastic virtualization technology, yet Xen gets all the hype these days. Why? Paravirtualization is pretty cool stuff, but seriously, what CPU's are made without some type of hardware-assisted virtualization support?

    1. Re:KVM by AlterRNow · · Score: 1

      The CPU in my Acer Aspire 5930 is one example: http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=36750

      --
      The disappearing pencil trick. Let me show you it.
    2. Re:KVM by IBBoard · · Score: 4, Informative

      Erm, quite a lot? Intel use it as one of their distinguishing factors between upper and lower tier chips (albeit one that they put in data sheets but don't make overly obvious).

    3. Re:KVM by 1s44c · · Score: 4, Informative

      Other features are a driver for almost-native KVM network performance

      KVM is fantastic virtualization technology, yet Xen gets all the hype these days. Why? Paravirtualization is pretty cool stuff, but seriously, what CPU's are made without some type of hardware-assisted virtualization support?

      Xen doesn't get all the hype. From what I've seen everyone is ditching xen and redhat is leading the way. Not that I mean to imply that xen deserves to get ditched, it's great too.

    4. Re:KVM by VTI9600 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm sure you are disappointed that your 200Mhz Pentium Pro doesn't support vt-x, but the rest of the world owns (or will soon purchase) processors that do. To see what I mean, just go to newegg.com. 63 out of the 76 (83%) desktop-class processors they sell have virtualization technology built in. 78 out of the 80 (98%) of the server-class (ones that really matter) processors they sell support it.

      And, if you still don't believe me, check out this page on Wikipedia for a list of the Intel processors that support VT-X. Among the crapload of processors listed, you'll notice that 100% of their newest, i3, i5 and i7 processors have virtualization support.

    5. Re:KVM by Jurily · · Score: 0, Redundant

      but seriously, what CPU's are made without some type of hardware-assisted virtualization support?

      Umm.. most of them?

    6. Re:KVM by Klinky · · Score: 1

      Even lower-end chips are coming out with VM tech. I am running a Celeron E3200 @ 3.8ghz w/ VTd. Though my old Pentium-Dual Core E2160 did not support VTd. There is old hardware out there that virtualization is used on such as P4s and earlier Core/Core2 CPUs.

    7. Re:KVM by Calinous · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you want an inexpensive chip, you should carefully check Intel's support for virtualization - by example, some of the E7400 and E7500 had it, some didn't. Same for E5400 and E5300 (some have it, some don't).

    8. Re:KVM by icebraining · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yeah, but then you have dick moves like my CPU supporting VT (AMD Neo) but being disabled by the Bios with no option to enable it. Thanks HP!

    9. Re:KVM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      *sigh* To everyone complaining about the shitty processors they got stuck with, I just want to say that for the past three (at least) years, I've been especially careful to make sure that the ones I bought had VT support. If you didn't do the same then maybe you didn't really need it that much to begin with.

    10. Re:KVM by arth1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think Redhat's dropping of Xen for KVM is as much politics as anything else. In the eyes of business, Xen = Citrix, and if going for Xen, why not go for Citrix?

      Personally, I'm very pleased with Xen except for the qemu IO performance. Setting the host's block device schedulers to noop (for linux guests) or deadline (for Windows guests) helps, but high host IO load still makes it very hard to do advertised features like instant failover using an NFS-hosted container.

    11. Re:KVM by mr_da3m0n · · Score: 1

      Personally, I'm very pleased with Xen except for the qemu IO performance. Setting the host's block device schedulers to noop (for linux guests) or deadline (for Windows guests) helps, but high host IO load still makes it very hard to do advertised features like instant failover using an NFS-hosted container.

      The solution to this would be to use PV drivers for HVM DomUs. This effectively closes the gap in performance between Paravirtualized DomUs and Fully Virtualized DomUs. Commercial XenServer provides them, and people routinely Build them. They are a bit of a pain to install on vanilla Xen DomUs, for they are not signed, and require a boot argument to be added to windows (/GPLPV) but they work as advertised.

    12. Re:KVM by mr_da3m0n · · Score: 1

      I would like to return your implicit question: What does KVM has that Xen has not? Why is everyone suddendly switching to it?

    13. Re:KVM by alen · · Score: 1

      my athlon 64 3200 had VT. no need to enable it in the BIOS like with intel either. it just works

    14. Re:KVM by shallot · · Score: 1

      Other features are a driver for almost-native KVM network performance

      KVM is fantastic virtualization technology, yet Xen gets all the hype these days. Why? Paravirtualization is pretty cool stuff, but seriously, what CPU's are made without some type of hardware-assisted virtualization support?

      Er, it's KVM that gets all the hype these days because it's still got some novelty. Xen just has the users, because it's simply more mature.

    15. Re:KVM by jsolan · · Score: 1

      Why would I want to spend money on buying new servers when the ones I own already work fine? Just because the next servers I buy will probably have vt-x, doesn't change the fact that the ones I currently own don't.

      Using the argument that people just need to upgrade their hardware is garbage. Virtualization is supposed to CUT costs, not incur new hardware costs. The fact that I could take old machines that have run their course as database servers and convert them into several virtual machines for more lightweight stuff (web,dns,ldap,etc.) is what drew me into virtualization in the first place.

    16. Re:KVM by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      I get the impression that the issue with the parent is regarding the motherboard, not the processor. HP have a habit of having their own bespoke boards in their desktop machines, more often than not with custom BIOS. Unless you have an HP computer (or Dell, Acer, $vendor machine) your situation will more than likely differ to theirs.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    17. Re:KVM by Enter+the+Shoggoth · · Score: 0

      Other features are a driver for almost-native KVM network performance

      KVM is fantastic virtualization technology, yet Xen gets all the hype these days. Why? Paravirtualization is pretty cool stuff, but seriously, what CPU's are made without some type of hardware-assisted virtualization support?

      You must be reading a very different set of websites to me.

      Of all the major linux distro's only OpenSuSE still ships with Xen, redhat, centos, fedora, debian and ubuntu are all kvm only and have been for quite some time.

      Also KVM is linux only by it's very nature, some of us do use the still dying *BSD and the in purgatory OpenSolaris some of which support Xen out of the box so I for one welcome a non-kvm only future for opensource hypervisors. :)

      Frankly I would say that it's the exact opposite of what you say - KVM is getting all the hype, unless you are referring to the commercial XenSource/Citrix offering which is respectfully suggest is a very different kettle of fish.

      --
      Andy Warhol got it right / Everybody gets the limelight
      Andy Warhol got it wrong / Fifteen minutes is too long.
    18. Re:KVM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, the high/low difference is now virtualized I/O then basic VT-D (pacifica) virtualization

    19. Re:KVM by coryking · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You put your virtualization on the new machines not on the hand-me-down stuff, silly. Your old machines weren't speced for them. You need to run the thing on a box that can take a crap-ton of RAM, has really fast I/O, and depending on the load, has the ability to take a NIC per VM.

      "Virtualization is supposed to CUT costs, not incur new hardware costs"

      It does cut costs... it cuts hardware costs by allowing you to buy fewer servers. Instead of buying new servers for DNS, LDAP, Web, and Email, you can buy one server, one license for the virtualization software, and consolidate the whole mess.

      Cutting costs doesn't always imply using hand-me-down hardware. If the CPU doesn't have hardware VM built on it, it isn't an ideal candidate for serving virtual machines period. Those old servers might just have to sold on craigslist to some web-shop looking for extra web servers to shove behind their load balancer.

      PS: This is one reason businesses lease servers instead of buy them. It makes it easy to cycle out the old junk every few years.

    20. Re:KVM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was disabled on mine, but there was a trick that involved patching and flashing the bios that got it switched on.

      It can't remember the links that I used, but it seems that there now is also a way to re-enable it with grub.

      http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/06/sony_vaio_virtualization_disabled/

      http://www.linuxformat.gr/?q=content/how-unlock-and-enable-hardware-accelerated-virtualization-technology-vt-sony-vaio-laptop-and

      http://levicki.net/articles/tips/2009/02/20/HOWTO_Enable_Intel_VT_on_Sony_VAIO_notebook_with_AMI_Aptio_EFI_BIOS.php
      http://vaioubuntu.wordpress.com/2009/03/26/vt-xvmx-virtualization-patch-for-sony-vaio-fw/

      http://feature-enable.blogspot.com/2009/07/enable-vt-on-insydeh2o-based-sony-vaio.html

    21. Re:KVM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Where do you get the idea that Debian doesn't support Xen? I use it in Debian on a daily basis.

      From my desktop running Squeeze:

      $ apt-cache search xen-
      aide-xen - Advanced Intrusion Detection Environment - static binary for XEN
      dtc-xen-firewall - A small firewall script for your dom0
      libjaxen-java-doc - Java XPath engine - documentation
      libjaxen-java - Java XPath engine
      libxen-dev - Public headers and libs for Xen
      xen-docs-3.4 - Documentation for Xen
      xen-hypervisor-3.4-amd64 - The Xen Hypervisor on AMD64
      xen-hypervisor-3.4-i386 - The Xen Hypervisor on i386
      xen-utils-3.4 - XEN administrative tools
      xen-utils-common - XEN administrative tools - common files
      xenwatch - Virtualization utilities, mostly for Xen

      I get the same return when running the same command on my laptop which runs Sid, and a couple of servers running Lenny. If Debian's abandoned Xen, then someone should tell the Debian devs about it, as they are still supporting it and seemingly have no thought of dropping for at least a couple of years seeing how Xen is in both Squeeze and Sid.

      If I had not made the search look specifically for packages that include xen- it would have showed the kernels that support dom0 and many other packages related Xen, but then the list would have been too long for posting here.

    22. Re:KVM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes because you are supposed to buy a new computer so often over the past 3 years.

    23. Re:KVM by jon3k · · Score: 1

      full featured management tools. kvm is woefully behind the curve. until you make it approachable by administrators used to the xen management tools and vmware virtual infrastructure client you won't see it catch on like other hypervisors have. sad but true.

    24. Re:KVM by drsmithy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Virtualization is supposed to CUT costs, not incur new hardware costs.

      It's not even remotely uncommon for overall cost-cutting to require additional up front expenses.

    25. Re:KVM by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Atoms. Old ones. The Opteron 285's in my dual socket server at home, for example.

    26. Re:KVM by ckaminski · · Score: 4, Informative

      KVM is not controlled by any company, and is done the "right way" according to Linus and friends.

      Whereas Xen is nominally controlled by Citrix.

      Either way, both are GPL and both are compatible with libvirt so it seems a moot point. Use whatever your distro comes with.

      What I really want is OpenVZ in the Kernel. Sometimes, I just want a lightweight VM...

    27. Re:KVM by h00manist · · Score: 1

      KVM is fantastic virtualization technology, yet Xen gets all the hype these days. Why?

      Well... in part because the open source world had embraced and promoted it for a long time. Corporations buying up open source projects and using them as a base platform for their commercial products is a problem. Or is it not? I'm not sure I understood exactly what happened with Xen and open source.

      --
      Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
    28. Re:KVM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dell and HP have had problems with consistency of support for virtual machine extensions.

      Sometimes the option is there and works like it should.
      Sometimes the option isn't in the BIOS at all and can't be enabled at all.
      Sometimes the option is there and turning it on causes your whole machine to hard lock.

      A friend of mine had #3 hit on a laptop a year or two back. The CPU supported the extensions, the BIOS recognized such and allowed him to enable them, but the actual use of the extensions would cause the whole machine to die on the spot. Didn't matter if it was VMWare, VirtualBox, or VirtualPC.

    29. Re:KVM by mr_da3m0n · · Score: 1

      Not only that but consumer HP BIOSes are notoriously bad, especially on hardware that was formerly Compaq's line. This laptop I have here has only one configuration option, and it's the date and time. Not that the workstation range is any better either...

    30. Re:KVM by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can't speak for HP; but some of Dell's recent laptops appear to have had BIOSes written by either crack addled monkeys, or shareware programmers from 1995 equipped with VB6 -> assembly converters.

      The E6500, for instance, supposedly a solid business-class laptop, was announced August 12, 2008. As of January 25, 2010, it had enjoyed its twentieth BIOS update.

    31. Re:KVM by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      KVM is fantastic virtualization technology, yet Xen gets all the hype these days.

      More or less the exact opposite of the truth.

      The kernel guys very nearly killed Xen despite it outperforming KVM (in either paravirtualised or HVM mode).

      It's true that many neato research things get done with Xen (lockstep for fault tolerance for example), but that says more about the ease of working with Xen than any "hype" effect.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    32. Re:KVM by oatworm · · Score: 3, Informative

      We have a bunch of HPs in the office that I thought had this problem too. However, it turns out HP hides the VT-X enable flag under the Security Options in the BIOS (I can only imagine how that makes any sense, but whatever), at least on their desktop machines. Could be worth a look.

    33. Re:KVM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's nice and all, but when a vendor makes the purchasers at your company a "good deal" on some expensive, high end quad-Xeon servers during your once-in-a-blue-moon technology refresh... and you find out that you're just out of luck when you want to do virtualization because they were dumping their older, feature-obsolete CPUs on you... even though technically these CPUs are still being manufactured... all the lists in the world don't make you less grumpy about it.

    34. Re:KVM by Nynaeve · · Score: 1

      My understanding was that VT on AMD CPUs (AMD-V) is always active and does not need to be enabled by the BIOS. Use this utility to confirm.

    35. Re:KVM by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      I've been seeing more and more attention focused on KVM and less on Xen. For example, I believe Debian plans to abandon Xen after Squeeze

    36. Re:KVM by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      There's a xen enabled kernel available in the CentOS plus repository.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    37. Re:KVM by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Uuum, with VirtualBox they recommend switching the hardware virtualization OFF, since their own implementation is a lot faster.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    38. Re:KVM by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't exactly call a switch that lets you access multiple physical machine from one mouse and keyboard as virtualization.

      That said, it may even be better, since you only have one mouse and keyboard to worry about (and no getting up from your chair) and can access multiple applications on multiple machines, with the advantage that a hardware crash will only take out one system, rather than multiple virtual one.

      You can get a KVM switch from WalMart for less that $31 right now according to Google. Isn't that less than the payware version of VMWare? (yes I know they have a free version)

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    39. Re:KVM by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      Spoken like a true politician.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    40. Re:KVM by RocketRabbit · · Score: 1

      Whoooosh!

    41. Re:KVM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The last three CPU's I bought, I checked to see if they supported virtualization. Believe it or not, some people on /. own more than one computer!!!

    42. Re:KVM by VTI9600 · · Score: 1

      Of all the major linux distro's only OpenSuSE still ships with Xen, redhat, centos, fedora, debian and ubuntu are all kvm only and have been for quite some time.

      I don't know about the other distro's you mention, but CentOS only just added KVM packages in version 5.4, which was released a mere 7 months ago. The last version I used was 5.3 which had Xen as the default. From reading the current docs, it seems like it still is.

      Xen gets hyped because most major cloud computing stacks run on top of it. Try explaining to upper management why you want to use something different than what Amazon used even though it's free. That being said, I'm not trying to criticize Xen...I think they're both great.

    43. Re:KVM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that is the kind of CPU that isn't made with hardware-assisted virtualization: crippled Intel shit.

      If you want anything less than the highest-end gear, buy AMD.

    44. Re:KVM by deanoaz · · Score: 1

      >>> Of all the major linux distro's only OpenSuSE still ships with Xen, redhat, centos, fedora, debian and ubuntu are all kvm only and have been for quite some time.

      Redhat isn't KVM only. In fact, after I do a kernel update I often have to manually set it back to booting the non-XEN kernel because it switches to it by default.

      --
      If 'the people' in Amendment 2 are 'the state' then Amendments 1, 2, 4, 9, and 10 benefit the state, not you.
    45. Re:KVM by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

      Then you take http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenBIOS and write your own. I'm serious, people like to complain that features aren't supported when the only thing stopping them is there own faith. Sure you can do ALOT of damage but just be careful and test it in a VM first. I've written several bios firmwares for my current MOBO and they all out preform the stock.

    46. Re:KVM by Genocaust · · Score: 1

      Then you take http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenBIOS and write your own. I'm serious, people like to complain that features aren't supported when the only thing stopping them is there own faith. Sure you can do ALOT of damage but just be careful and test it in a VM first. I've written several bios firmwares for my current MOBO and they all out preform the stock.

      Comments like this are what turn a lot of people off from Linux. "Oh you don't like xyz? Go write it yourself." We're not all xyz devs (or devs at all, in most instances).

      --
      It could be that the only purpose of your life is to serve as a warning to others.
    47. Re:KVM by jsolan · · Score: 1

      You put your virtualization on the new machines not on the hand-me-down stuff, silly. Your old machines weren't speced for them.

      No, technically they weren't. But the specs fit the need.

      PS: This is one reason businesses lease servers instead of buy them. It makes it easy to cycle out the old junk every few years.

      Very true. But the cost of buying out the lease of existing servers to use as dom0's was more cost effective than leasing new servers that would be overkill for the entire length of the lease. It's cost justification. Next leasing cycle, specs need to be re-evaluated.

      If the CPU doesn't have hardware VM built on it, it isn't an ideal candidate for serving virtual machines period.

      Wrong. The CPU's still work great with paravirtualization for creating linux vm's. Just because everyone tends to ignore xen's ability to paravirtualize, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. It works very well and is very ideal for some needs.

    48. Re:KVM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux containers (LXC) promises to supply "OpenVZ in the kernel." It's got libvirt support but it's not quite ready for production yet. OpenVZ seemed abandoned up until a few weeks before Ubuntu Lucid was released. The devs magically popped up and threw together some patches for .32. I'm running about 4 machines on OpenVZ, it's a great tech, but I can't wait for LXC to replace it (official OOB kernel support being the main factor.)

    49. Re:KVM by IMightB · · Score: 1

      KVM is the official linux way... It has been blessed. Xen is, at least last time I checked, stuck with kernel 2.6.9 because it a horrid mess of patch sets. There was a shit ton of work going on, perhaps still going on, to clean up xen's code base so that I can be applied to newer kernels.

    50. Re:KVM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LXC is already there and the latest Ubuntu (or Debian) already comes with a compatible kernel.
      http://lxc.teegra.net
      http://blog.foaa.de/2010/05/lxc-on-debian-squeeze

    51. Re:KVM by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Nope, I don't really have a Security tab.

    52. Re:KVM by icebraining · · Score: 1

      My complaint is not that the feature isn't supported; I complain because the feature is there, and they purposely disabled it!

    53. Re:KVM by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

      Your right that most people aren't xyz dev's and can't go out and write a massive program to preform xyz. However how many people can use Excel to do math via Formula's or Use iptables to block traffic on a network. It's all in the same scope, with a little reading, and it is very short, an average slashdot user could make there own Bios. I say slashdot user because I would tend to think we have a little bit of an easier time on the computer then say my grandma.

    54. Re:KVM by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

      but having the option disabled all the time is the same as not having it at all.

    55. Re:KVM by oatworm · · Score: 1

      Huh. Well, the ones we have at work are the "Compaq Business Desktops" that they've been cranking out for years ("dc"-series), so that might have something to do with it.

    56. Re:KVM by NotBorg · · Score: 1

      KVM doesn't cost you a damned thing. Are you a a filthy Windows user? ...

      Oh I see the problem. Bing puts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KVM_switch above http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Main_Page

      You want the second one.

      --
      I want this account deleted.
    57. Re:KVM by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Thanks, but:

      This utility detected that AMD Virtualization Technology is not enabled in BIOS. Enable AMD-V in BIOS. Re-run this utility to further verify your system is compatible with Hyper-V.

    58. Re:KVM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux-VServer is lightweight.

  3. All Very Nice But... by mrpacmanjel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is the RT2500-based chipset working reliably now?

    The developers switched to a new driver model because it's "better".

    If "better" means once-working wifi chipset becomes grossly unstable, previous drivers are considered "legacy" hence will not compile on kernels later that 2.6.29 and current drivers are as stable as a "one-legged man playing football".

    A few years later and 2.6.34 is released - is it working yet?

    Considering the RT2500 chipset is present many wifi products the current state of "stability" is woefully inadequate.

    (and don't get me started on f***ed up i845 drivers for xorg! - worked fine under previous kernels & xorg an update later by both - graphics performance royally screwed and many crashes)

    Apart from that - happy Linux user for over 10 years!

    1. Re:All Very Nice But... by dbIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is the RT2500-based chipset working reliably now?

      Here's how the dismal state of support for that chipset was explained to me.
      The answer is probably that mine has worked for years and yours hasn't. The really annoying thing is a lot of slightly different things have come out under that name and even under MS Windows if you don't use the driver that came with it you are stuffed - a driver for another undocumented variant won't help.

    2. Re:All Very Nice But... by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Though the RT2500 support has been slow in coming it has been stable for over a year now.

    3. Re:All Very Nice But... by HateBreeder · · Score: 4, Informative

      The problem is that the RT2500 chipset is proprietary, closed-source that's "maintained" by a Taiwanese manufacturer who doesn't care about his users at all and only wants to sell cheap hardware and as much of it as possible.

      Why would you get quality, polished drivers that are updated to support newer paradigms in newer kernels if the manufacturer isn't cooperating?

      I think it's magic that these drivers work at all.

      Next time, buy better kit with a reputable mfr that cares about linux support.

      --
      Sigs are for the weak.
    4. Re:All Very Nice But... by mrpacmanjel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem for me is that the "legacy" drivers were rock solid and I never thought about it until kernel 2.6.30 & greater were released.

      My wifi was ultra-reliable under the "legacy" drivers.

      Since the newer drivers were released I have had nothing but problems.

      What changed between old and new drivers?

    5. Re:All Very Nice But... by HateBreeder · · Score: 1

      Would you use windows 98 drivers with windows 7?

      They most likely would not work.

      You would download newer versions of the drivers... right? you wouldn't complain to microsoft that your win98 drivers aren't working anymore, would you?

      So why do you think the same situation should just magically work in Linux?

      --
      Sigs are for the weak.
    6. Re:All Very Nice But... by mrpacmanjel · · Score: 0, Troll

      Applying that argument to Linux is retarded.

    7. Re:All Very Nice But... by AvitarX · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Because as a Linux user I have become quite accustomed to things "just working".

      Unfortunately, wireless destroys that notion, causing irritation (though my thinkpad T500 shows me how it is when the stuff does work, and it's great).

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    8. Re:All Very Nice But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the problem with Linux as opposed to a proprietary environment like Windows or OS X.

      In proprietary land, backwards compatibility is pretty much mandatory, supporting older existing software is paramount even if it means compromising on elegance or "cleanliness" of design. In Open land, the maintainer can rewrite their subsystem on a whim without even bothering to create a one or two year roadmap for people to prepare.

      Talk all you want about "technical superiority", stuff that works is generally always better than stuff that doesn't.

      [Linux user since 2001]

    9. Re:All Very Nice But... by mrpacmanjel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Generally Linux works very well.

      For me the two biggest problems seems to be wifi & graphics cards.

      ATI decided my r300-based card was legacy and discontinued it via the closed-sources drivers. I'm screwed(thankfully the open source drivers are ok but nowhere near as fast).

      RT2500 - I could download the source of the serialmonkey drivers and compile them. Great it works fine and did that with every distro upgrade.

      Then these drivers were abandoned and all focus is now on the in-kernel version and stability has suffered ever since.

      I would have thought the maintainers could have adapted the legacy driver to work with the new kernel - even as a temporary solution.

      Then again Linux is a "server" OS and seen that way from the kernel maintainers.

    10. Re:All Very Nice But... by e70838 · · Score: 1

      I switch to Linux exactly because windows vista64 and windows 7 do not provide drivers for my old printer and my old scanner. No driver problem with Linux, because Linux supports legacy hardware.

    11. Re:All Very Nice But... by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      What changed between old and new drivers?

      What part of "open source" is confusing you?

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    12. Re:All Very Nice But... by stsp · · Score: 3, Informative

      The problem is that the RT2500 chipset is proprietary, closed-source that's "maintained" by a Taiwanese manufacturer who doesn't care about his users at all and only wants to sell cheap hardware and as much of it as possible.

      Well, actually, Ralink has for a long time been providing documentation to open source developers writing drivers for their devices, without requiring an NDA.

    13. Re:All Very Nice But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What changed between old and new drivers?

      What part of "open source" is confusing you?

      What part of "not everyone is a kernel hacker that is keeping close tabs on the development of every single driver they use on a daily bases as the kernel progresses" is confusing you? I know, I know, every single person is supposed to have the entire kernel tree, complete with commit history, completely memorized.

    14. Re:All Very Nice But... by Rogerborg · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Let me clear it up for you. "Open source" means "If you come bitching and moaning to me that I haven't freely given you enough of my time already, while being too Goddamn lazy to make any contributions of your own, then I will mock you back into the Stone Age."

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    15. Re:All Very Nice But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Let me clear it up for you. "Open source" means "If you come bitching and moaning to me that I haven't freely given you enough of my time already, while being too Goddamn lazy to make any contributions of your own, then I will mock you back into the Stone Age."

      So the original post was someone whining to you personally about linux drivers? The guy asked a general question about a driver with some odd history. Either respond like a normal human being or shut the hell up.

    16. Re:All Very Nice But... by LinuxAndLube · · Score: 1

      He he. He said "normal human being" on Slashdot. He he.

    17. Re:All Very Nice But... by mrpacmanjel · · Score: 1, Informative

      "..mock you back into the Stone.."

      Yeah, much like your attitude and you live-up to the narky-sterotypical "open source" kid who put people (and businesses) off Linux altogether.

      I would love to fix the source myself but two things hold me back:
      (1) I just do not know enough about wifi & various chipsets to do something about it
      (2) Unfortunately, I do not have an infinite amount of time to dedicate to the rt2500 problems (I have other obligations in "meat" space - e.g. partner, kids and full-time job)

      Unfortunately I have wasted precious moments replying to you post instead.

      FWIW: I am extremely grateful to people who develop the Linux kernel, use an open source license and the enormous amount of open-source software (e.g. Linus, Richard Stallman, the "faceless" people that spend their time writing software).

      Because of them I am free from my dependency on Windows and actually have a realistic choice.

      So basically rogerborg, F*** Off.

    18. Re:All Very Nice But... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Applying that argument to Linux is retarded.

      Uhh... why?

      What, you think the driver model, network stack, etc, in Linux is 100% static and will never, ever change?

      The only reason you think it's "retarded" is because Microsoft likes these big splash releases every five years, while Linux is constantly evolving, and that means if the driver model changes, it could very well be between minor revision numbers (which aren't actually minor).

    19. Re:All Very Nice But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aaaaahahhahahaha. Asshats like you make me glad to be alive. Anyone whose ego was crushed by being mocked by *you* and your fetid ilk deserves a fucking kicking -- fortunately, there aren't many people in the world who are that pathetic.

    20. Re:All Very Nice But... by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 4, Informative

      Except they did work, and worked better, in the last version. The kernel maintainers swapped out the working version for a flakey version, and now have made enough changes that the working version won't work even if you compile it in manually.

      Did it occur to you to actually read the post you were replying to? This was in all there, not behind a link or anything.

    21. Re:All Very Nice But... by HateBreeder · · Score: 1

      My point was that the kernel should move ahead and have the driver developers keep up - not the other way around.

      --
      Sigs are for the weak.
    22. Re:All Very Nice But... by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Well, those driver developers are obviously doing a bang-up job is the quality of the driver goes down over time. Kudos, anonymous heroes! Continue to make our software worse! Soon you will have banished the scourge of usable, stable software forever!

    23. Re:All Very Nice But... by HateBreeder · · Score: 1

      That's the other point... they're not anonymous. the manufacturer keeps the specs closed, the chip is undocumented... you rely on the manufacturer's software engineers to write your drivers.. and the manufacturer doesn't care about new kernel versions. they made it work once with the 'current' thing when the chip came out - from then you're on your own.

      do you bother reading anything before you post?

      --
      Sigs are for the weak.
    24. Re:All Very Nice But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why you don't ignore problems early on.

      Mandatory car analogy:
      When you pop a wheel on a car and replace it with a spare, you don't keep riding on that spare till it pops too.

    25. Re:All Very Nice But... by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Sorry, too busy to read your long winded rant about how busy you are.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    26. Re:All Very Nice But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the Win98 drivers were stable, but the Win7 drivers completely suck, it bloody well is a valid argument.

      Linux is great and all that, but the regression in some area's is staggering, especially in Ubuntu. WiFi worked (for me) in older Ubuntu's but since 8.x it is really hard to get working. Audio is a joke with PulseAudio included as the default. It. Doesn't. Work. Properly. Even the PA developer says so!

      I use Linux (Ubuntu), as it frankly is the best desktop OS available. But man, dealing with the retarded "oh, shiny" mentality of some developers is a drag.

    27. Re:All Very Nice But... by oakgrove · · Score: 1

      I've never seen an RT25xx USB adapter work well under any OS. My brother has 2 of them one made by Linksys and the other something else. The one made by Linksys will immediately bluescreen Windows XP by the mere fact of plugging it in. You have to disable the service that automatically manages wi-fi adapters (whatever it's called, I use Linux) to get it so you can even install the drivers. On his Window 7 game machine, get this, he 4 boxes Everquest and when he uses the other RT25xx adapter, he can 3 box but if he starts up the fourth one, like clockwork, Window 7 bluescreens and of course when you read it, you see the thing about the RT25xx driver having caused the problem.

      I tried his adapters on my Ubuntu netbook and the Linksys worked but the other one would see the network but couldn't connect to it. Boggles the mind.

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    28. Re:All Very Nice But... by oatworm · · Score: 1

      Because we're not talking about Win98->Win 7. Instead, we're functionally talking about the equivalent of, say, Win XP SP2->SP3, only someone somewhere got it in their head (Linus) that the Linux driver API should be allowed to freely change every year or two and, if anybody has a problem with that, it's because "they don't care about open drivers" and "you should let the kernel maintainers write the drivers anyway because they know the kernel better than you". That's a bit different from "I expect VDI drivers to work 15 years after they were written". Because of the constant flux of the Linux driver API, you periodically get major hardware breakage - hardware that worked just fine using an open driver in, say, 2.6.25 will break in 2.6.26 because somebody forgot to replace quietly deprecated SA_* calls with equivalent IRQF_* calls, for example, and, if the maintainer for that particular driver is gone, well, you're just out of luck.

      Gosh, if only manufacturers would release schematics for their hardware, we wouldn't have any problems. /sarcasm

    29. Re:All Very Nice But... by Simetrical · · Score: 1

      Then again Linux is a "server" OS and seen that way from the kernel maintainers.

      I'm pretty sure all the kernel maintainers use Linux on their desktops, too. Certainly Linus Torvalds does! The problem is that desktop hardware is so heterogeneous. Just because it works for them, doesn't mean it works for you. If a prominent kernel developer had an RT2500, you can bet that it would be supported just fine to this day.

      --
      MediaWiki developer, Total War Center sysadmin
    30. Re:All Very Nice But... by Randle_Revar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >ATI decided my r300-based card was legacy and discontinued it via the closed-sources drivers. I'm screwed(thankfully the open source drivers are ok but nowhere near as fast).

      ATI/AMD abandoned those cards not only because they where old, but also specifically because the OSS drivers for them were complete, if not that fast. They wouldn't have dropped them otherwise.

    31. Re:All Very Nice But... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the RT2500 chipset is proprietary, closed-source that's "maintained" by a Taiwanese manufacturer who doesn't care about his users at all and only wants to sell cheap hardware and as much of it as possible.

      The problem is that, if you walk into, say, Best Buy, 4 out of every 5 network adapters on sale will be using RT* chips.

      Yeah, I know it can be an issue with Linux (with all kinds of hardware), hence why I check compatibility lists before buying. Your casual Ubuntu user? Not so much.

    32. Re:All Very Nice But... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Would you use windows 98 drivers with windows 7?

      No, but I would use Win2K drivers with Win7, and, ironically, they work more often than not.

    33. Re:All Very Nice But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would have thought the maintainers could have adapted the legacy driver to work with the new kernel - even as a temporary solution.

      If you think this is a result of some snobbish attitude by kernel developers, go ahead and try it... There are some spectacularly bad out-of-tree and staging drivers: just keeping them compiling is a big effort, improving them to kernel level is like poking sticks in your eyes.

      And remember, while you are poking sticks in your eyes, no-one is actually testing the in-kernel driver that has a real future -- because you are maintaining the godawful monstrosity and people just live with that. This is not a hypothetical problem, this is every day reality in the kernel.

      Now, you wanted a solution right now: Go to a store and buy a wireless card/chip from a linux friendly manufacturer (e.g. Intel). Cost should be under $20 and your wifi performance and reliability should be excellent.

    34. Re:All Very Nice But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since you are apparently informative, could you tell me which working drivers was "swapped" from the kernel when rt2x000 went in? Because I can't remember anything like that happening.

      I do remember serialmonkey stopping legacy support, but that was (for good reasons) never in the kernel, was it?

    35. Re:All Very Nice But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well according to the reply on the kernel mailing list, the complaint about exactly the RT2500 module is it needs
      a firmware, and because of a kernel development policy (from 2.6.30) that firmware is now placed seperately in a firmware tree.

    36. Re:All Very Nice But... by lahs0n · · Score: 1

      *grumble*

      I was pleased to find kernel modesetting for my Intel 910GM graphics, but in load situations (3D/Flash) X would guaranteeably crash -- wasn't a problem from 2.6.32 on.

      But then, from 2.6.31 on, b43 is broken (at least with a 4306 rev.3) in that wlan0 never stays associated for more than 20 seconds at a time. Forums lead me to believe that--given the error ("disassociating from xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx by local choice (reason=3)")--whatever changes in the kernel (or module) code may be triggering RFKILL at will..??

      This may be OT, but if broken Ralink concerns belong, so should someone have a bit of insight regarding the Broadcom module when none of the forums (as many as I've questioned, I know) have a clue. I was running Ubuntu Lucid-RC (consider it stable) and then Arch 2010.04, and have tested many others, all with the same outcome. Boot to a kernel older than 2.6.31 and no issue, just no hope for KMS.

      Is there any hope for a revert of the code if not a rewrite of the module or a simple workaround?? I'm afraid of being disappointed yet again with this kernel, damn shame when Arch is much more frugal with RAM than even my lite Windows install, which I've always considered a backup to Linux until now.

      I had no such problem with Ralink (rt61) but then I haven't had that card since 2.6.23.

  4. Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    With releases like these, it's no wonder M$ is getting worried. Been running this kernel a while now on our production servers (even from before it it was tagged release, I like running bleeding edge in order to get the most performance from my company's hardware investment) and save from a few data corruptions issues, it's been rock stable! I have to play with the new KVM support later on one of the servers with the least amount of customers on it (couple of hundreds), looks nice!

    Sadly... it looks like my company is looking at going with Windoze for a few important servers because of a few outtages. I know it was because of faulty hardware, because I had just compiled a custom kernel for those servers with just the right flags needed (I want to get the most performance!) but this must have triggered a hardware bug because the kernel worked fine on my work laptop. Sigh...

    Anyway, keep up the good work!

    1. Re:Excellent by putaro · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Hmmm...sounds like your company would be better off hiring a new systems administrator than going with Windows. Good thing you're posting as AC!

    2. Re:Excellent by westlake · · Score: 1

      It looks like my company is looking at going with Windoze for a few important servers because of a few outtages. I know it was because of faulty hardware, because I had just compiled a custom kernel for those servers with just the right flags needed (I want to get the most performance!) but this must have triggered a hardware bug because the kernel worked fine on my work laptop...

      Help Wanted, Male.

    3. Re:Excellent by cduffy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      seriously, how many system administrators even take their time to compile custom kernels nowadays for maximum performance?

      That's a bug, not a feature.

      "Maximum performance"? If it's storing customer data, I want a kernel that's had heavy automated testing, a full round of manual QA, and validation by my hardware vendor, thank you very much.

    4. Re:Excellent by robthebob · · Score: 1

      Don't feed the troll! This post is clearly a sarcastic joke...

    5. Re:Excellent by 1s44c · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You don't put bleeding edge or custom kernels on production servers without seriously heavy testing. You would not run production stuff on a windows beta release would you? It's the same thing.

      Stick to proper releases of good distributions and customize as little as possible. You will get a system many times more stable than anything MS has ever come up with.

    6. Re:Excellent by nacturation · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Not only am I good at what I do (seriously, how many system administrators even take their time to compile custom kernels nowadays for maximum performance?), but a very close relative is also the CEO. I bet people here even use us for their hosting :)

      Hopefully not, as a competent administrator knows that data integrity is far more important that a fractional improvement in performance.

      but this must have triggered a hardware bug because the kernel worked fine on my work laptop

      Exactly. A competent admin would have tested the config on identical hardware as what is running in production. That you consider a laptop to be sufficient testing demonstrates either a lack of funding for your "the CEO and I share DNA" company or that you suffer from a lack of training.

      Sadly... it looks like my company is looking at going with Windoze for a few important servers because of a few outtages.

      Had you properly designed your system for redundancy, you wouldn't have experienced those issues. Or if you weren't dicking around with kernels that should not be used in production, you similarly would not have experienced the outages. I take it you're going to be running the latest Windows Server alpha and beta releases from Microsoft in order to get maximum performance?

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    7. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Successful troll is successful, I guess. Well done.

    8. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. A competent admin would have tested the config on identical hardware as what is running in production. That you consider a laptop to be sufficient testing demonstrates either a lack of funding for your "the CEO and I share DNA" company or that you suffer from a lack of training.

      For the record, obviously I was testing the kernel in a virtual machine on my laptop, using the same version of the distribution we use (in-house, built by me, but originally based on a now ancient version of Red hat).

      Had you properly designed your system for redundancy, you wouldn't have experienced those issues. Or if you weren't dicking around with kernels that should not be used in production, you similarly would not have experienced the outages. I take it you're going to be running the latest Windows Server alpha and beta releases from Microsoft in order to get maximum performance?

      Either a customer's data is on a server, or it is not. If that machine fails, it doesn't matter if we are running Linux or Windoze or whatever, you still have to startup a spare machine and restore from backups. I just know that if we were running Windoze, we (I) would have to restore failing machines far more often than now, that's all.

    9. Re:Excellent by shish · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why are all the replies to this comment seeming to take it seriously? :-|

      --
      I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
    10. Re:Excellent by linuxgurugamer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Huh? You are running unreleased kernels, you _admit_ that you have "data corruptions issues" and you claim "rock stable"?

      What idiot runs beta kernels on production servers? I'm glad you aren't working for me, because I'd fire your ass for doing this.

      Production servers are NOT the place to run beta kernels.

      And you are complaining because your company is going with Windows "because of a few outages"? How do you know that it wasn't a kernel bug triggered by that hardware configuration? Your laptop has different hardware than your servers, you simply cannot assume that since it runs fine on your laptop that it will also be fine on the server.

      People like you annoy me. "Most performance" does NOT equal good business. The most important thing to a business is total reliability. Play with the new stuff on a test system, not on a production system

    11. Re:Excellent by linuxgurugamer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I used to compile kernels, but stopped. There is no way that I, as a single administrator, can perform all the necessary testing to assure that there aren't any kernel problems. So now I don't, but now I get 100% uptime instead. I prefer the uptime to the performance.

    12. Re:Excellent by linuxgurugamer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because I've heard the exact same thing from people who actually believe it and have done it at their job. It is a comment made by a young, inexperienced person (I can't call them an administrator) who doesn't have the experience to understand the problems with doing this.

    13. Re:Excellent by 1s44c · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah... that's not going to happen. Not only am I good at what I do (seriously, how many system administrators even take their time to compile custom kernels nowadays for maximum performance?), but a very close relative is also the CEO. I bet people here even use us for their hosting :)

      There is a massive amount of difference between being able to compile a custom kernel and being in the kind of situation where it's the right thing to do. 'Good at what you do' doesn't mean technically brilliant, it means doing the right thing at the right time.

      Keeping your job because you are related to the CEO is the kind of nepotism that kills otherwise good companies.

    14. Re:Excellent by arth1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Why are all the replies to this comment seeming to take it seriously? :-|

      Because (a) it is Monday morning, and (b) Sturgeon's law applies to /. posters too.
      And, unfortunately, (c) there are idiots like that out there. But they generally don't change their posting prefs to AC when bragging about their latest folly...

    15. Re:Excellent by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      For the record, obviously I was testing the kernel in a virtual machine on my laptop, using the same version of the distribution we use (in-house, built by me, but originally based on a now ancient version of Red hat).

      That's sick, ugly, and wrong. What's worse is you actually think you are doing the right thing.

      Stop messing about and replace all the custom stuff with standard stuff before you drag your company to its knees or drive it into the arms of Microsoft.

    16. Re:Excellent by Kjella · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because I've heard the exact same thing from people who actually believe it and have done it at their job. It is a comment made by a young, inexperienced person (I can't call them an administrator) who doesn't have the experience to understand the problems with doing this.

      What, can't be. According to slashdot all Linux administrators are born as black belt Linux experts and Windows administrators are all people that got lucky bumbling through their MSCE exam. Usually in comparison where five incompetent Windows administrators could be replaced with one competent Linux administrator, even though you could probably replace five incompetents with one competent one in general.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    17. Re:Excellent by solanum · · Score: 1

      Whooooossssshhhhhh!!!! That was the grand-parent post going over your head.

      Now why was the parent marked insightful exactly?

      --
      Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
    18. Re:Excellent by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      Why are all the replies to this comment seeming to take it seriously? :-|

      Because some of us have had to clean up the mess left by people like him. The world is full of people who do really stupid things whilst thinking they are doing a good job.

    19. Re:Excellent by 1s44c · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What, can't be. According to slashdot all Linux administrators are born as black belt Linux experts and Windows administrators are all people that got lucky bumbling through their MSCE exam.

      Noone is born a black belt at anything. You have to work at it. There are inexperienced Linux admins just like there are inexperienced windows admins. The ones who can't or don't want to learn end up on windows eventually.

    20. Re:Excellent by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      (c) there are idiots like that out there. But they generally don't change their posting prefs to AC when bragging about their latest folly...

      The real idiots never figured out how to log in.

    21. Re:Excellent by msormune · · Score: 1

      I think the OP was being sarcastic... And I hope you were too also with your last sentence.

    22. Re:Excellent by the+entropy · · Score: 1

      WHOOOSH?

    23. Re:Excellent by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      Been running this kernel a while now on our production servers (even from before it it was tagged release, I like running bleeding edge in order to get the most performance from my company's hardware investment) and save from a few data corruptions issues, it's been rock stable!

      Save from a few data corruption issues?! :O Jesus christ, I really hope no one hires you again to handle system administration!

      A serious system administrator would NEVER run untested code on a live production server, and ESPECIALLY NOT if the code had caused even one case of data corruption!

      Besides that, you should not be playing and toying around with production servers.

    24. Re:Excellent by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Because regardless of what the grandparent said, the above post is insightful. It's also interesting to those who know nothing of Linux but do know of Windows servers falling over because of a mandatory patch, for example. For essential systems, a working stable configuration does indeed make more sense than a cutting edge potentially buggy one.

      I hate to trot out Ubuntu as an example, but why do you think they have Long Term Support releases? High availability production servers are not expected to run Ubuntu Server 9.10; It has a lot of patches which may break features which worked in previous versions (just look at the list of dependencies removed when you upgrade). I would expect a significant number of those servers to be running 8.04 LTS, and to potentially upgrade to 10.04.1 when it becomes available (the LTS version of LL still being relatively new and untested).

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    25. Re:Excellent by dwinks616 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/noone Pronoun noone 1. Common misspelling of no one. 2. Common misspelling of no-one. 3. Common misspelling of noöne.

    26. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And in other news, gullible slashdotters stop gazing at navels long enough to respond to tongue in cheek post by Anonymous Coward, proving yet again that Linux users take themselves far too seriously.

    27. Re:Excellent by Caviller · · Score: 1

      I don't know if I should WOOOSH, Laugh, or Cry on this one...

    28. Re:Excellent by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is this a new "Humorless Monday" holiday I haven't yet heard about? Or do kernel people really take themselves this seriously?

      Christ. You're like the fifth reply who didn't get that the parent was an EXTREMELY OBVIOUS JOKE. Laugh, stupid.

    29. Re:Excellent by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wow, two wooshes in one thread.

      Also:

      The ones who can't or don't want to learn end up on windows eventually.

      That's the dumbest fucking thing I have ever read in my life.

      You're seriously delusional if you think that Windows servers are inferior to Linux servers in any way. (Well, "any" way is an overstatement, but any practical way.) If you're doing communication, Exchange is great. If you're doing filesharing/single sign-on, Active Directory is also great. IIS is as good, or better, than Apache at all benchmarks, and has more features. Decent support for technologies like OLAP pretty much only exist on Windows at the moment.

      Nobody's going to argue that Windows is cheaper than Linux. But arguing that it's worse, that's harder to make-- unless of course you know fuck-all about Windows and just repeat FUD on Slashdot all day.

    30. Re:Excellent by nacturation · · Score: 1

      Either a customer's data is on a server, or it is not. If that machine fails, it doesn't matter if we are running Linux or Windoze or whatever, you still have to startup a spare machine and restore from backups. I just know that if we were running Windoze, we (I) would have to restore failing machines far more often than now, that's all.

      Troll or not, you can have redundant filesystem storage (eg: a redundant pair of high-end SAN devices) where the failure of any one component or entire device will not cause any downtime. You're right though... it doesn't matter if you're running Lunix or Windows as your apps will keep on ticking.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    31. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seems that no-one has realised the point of your post.

      And quite a valid one too.
      Who cares if we have to reboot the Windows Terminal Servers every night and the Windows File Servers once a week ?

      At least we know how to install and patch them and most importantly we don't need long term I.T. staff because we can get commodity off the shelf support from India or Pakistan or whichever is the next cheapest source of I.T. labour this week.

      For some reason no one seems to notice the high load Solaris file server that only needs to be booted when there is a scheduled outage of the power to the data center.

      P.S. I'm yet to be convinced that Linux ext3 is a valid UNIX file server option having lost data twice this year on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.X x86_64 systems. Once when ext3 decided to check the file system just because it was more that 39 mounts or 180 days (or whatever the defaults are) and lost everything (about 180 GB) without putting anything in lost+found and this was after a controlled shutdown just to increase the RAM of the VM (VMware ESX 3.5 with EMC SAN based storage). The client was really impressed with that.

      The next time was when tar | gzip of 507 GiB data completed successfully (no error on the console) but then only 375 GiB could be extracted because the gziped tar file was corrupt. This was only being done to recreate a Volume as two separate volumes so we could rsync between them weekly after the first data loss. How did the client feel after that ?

    32. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Normally it's poor form to just up and say, "I'm the best sysadmin ever, production server uptime nines stable secure would never run blah blah". but now they can carry on about how critically crucially important data is to them.

    33. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Original AC here ;) Well, what do you expect of someone who names himself linuxgurugamer? Linux users are such cute gullible creatures. Anyway, I got my free lunch. Made a bet with a co-worker that I could successfully troll the newest article on Slashdot; the fact that it was about a kernel release just made it so much easier.

    34. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Linux is so far superior to Windows because it is much harder to use.

    35. Re:Excellent by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 1

      He struck a nerve didn't he?

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    36. Re:Excellent by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I guess so, but I wouldn't put it the same way:

      I admined Linux servers for several years, and it did nothing but piss me off. Since moving to Windows servers, I've experienced zero change in functionality or stability, but I get a lot less pissed off on a daily basis. So I believe that's a good thing.

      The thing with Linux servers, is if you learn to do things the way they work, you're fine-- you need "telepathy" with whoever wrote the software, because it's nothing but dozens of undocumented assumptions. If you have, or can develop, that, then good for you. I can't. I don't think like the average Linux admin, and I just never will.

      Moreover, I don't see why I should have to: it's not hard to build usable software, Linux server app developers just... don't do it. Heck, usability aside, they can't even develop consistent interfaces for that matter.

      None of this is to say that Windows is a great server environment... it also has poor usability in several key areas. But its much, much better at both presenting the status of the system, and allowing configuration of the system. (And hey, if you want to do the telepathy thing, you can still drop into a console and do it all that way.)

    37. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I choose not to log in.

    38. Re:Excellent by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

      Besides that, you should not be playing and toying around with production servers

      Well not your own, obviously. But that asshat across the corridor with the open access point and other clueless security ineptitude is just begging to get a complimentary tweak.

      --
      There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
    39. Re:Excellent by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      Oh, it was a typo, obviously. It was supposed to read "nooner" - in reference to a good way to spend lunchtime with your mom.

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    40. Re:Excellent by oatworm · · Score: 1

      I know the AC is trolling, so I'll tell a semi-related story instead...

      A few years back, the IT services company I was working for at the time hired this kid that thought he was hot stuff. One of the first things he asked all of us was, "So, what services should I turn off in Windows for our customers so their machines will run better?" Now, I knew that gamers like to turn off various unnecessary Windows services to improve performance - obviously, if you're not in an Active Directory environment, you don't need the AD-related services running 24/7 (Computer Browser, Net Logon, etc.). Trouble was, all of our customers actually were in an AD environment - gamer-tuning Windows services for performance would break their networks in about 3.2 seconds. Of course, even if that weren't the case, it's not like any of that would help Excel or Word launch any faster, so it would be a waste of time either way.

      The kid didn't last a month.

    41. Re:Excellent by oakgrove · · Score: 1

      You're seriously delusional if you think that Windows servers are inferior to Linux servers in any way. (Well, "any" way is an overstatement, but any practical way.)

      A Linux server can run on significantly lower powered hardware than Windows Server can. For example, We have some application servers than run perfectly on ARM boards. It's experimental for now but it is working perfectly so far and will most likely be ramped up to production use in the near future. I'll let you do the math on the power and cost savings. Since architectural dependence is a property of the OS, I'd say Linux is actually superior in this regard. Am I also delusional if I find it quicker to administrate Linux with ssh than the alternatives on Windows? I have a remote desktop application for my phone but I'm quite sure it would take longer than it does for me to ssh into my machines.

      IIS is as good, or better, than Apache at all benchmarks, and has more features.

      First of all, Linux web server != Linux web server running Apache. They didn't stop making web servers that run on Linux when they made Apache in case you didn't get the memo. Second of all, your assertion that IIS on Windows is faster than Apache on Linux in all benchmarks is laughable.

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    42. Re:Excellent by Simetrical · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're seriously delusional if you think that Windows servers are inferior to Linux servers in any way. (Well, "any" way is an overstatement, but any practical way.)

      You're seriously delusional if you think that Windows servers are as good as Linux servers in every practical way. Linux has advantages beyond cost. For some large organizations, like Google, being able to tinker with the software is essential. For other organizations, some particular feature of Linux might be essential: like DRDB, or support for some application, or good software RAID (much better than Windows from what I've heard), or (soon) btrfs, or performance on their particular workload.

      If Windows Server were really as good as Linux in every "practical" way, only the cash-strapped would use Linux. That's simply not the case. The only top websites that use Windows, for example, are owned by Microsoft. On the other side of things, most shared hosts support only Linux, although typical web apps are completely portable. Why is this? Some of these are big companies; they would pay if Windows were better. But Linux does have advantages over Windows. Usually different advantages to different people, but they're there.

      I'm not dissing Windows Server. I'm sure it's a lot less hassle to work with unless you're a Linux guru, and it surely has some other great features that Linux doesn't. But Linux has real advantages too. If you deny that, I have no idea how you can explain its success.

      --
      MediaWiki developer, Total War Center sysadmin
    43. Re:Excellent by cameljockey91 · · Score: 1

      Noone is born a black belt at anything.

      Who is this Noone you speak of? She sounds pretty badass.

      Also, was this supposed to be an unbiased post? You say inexperienced admins are all the same, and then say the dumb ones end up on Windows. Troll much?

      --
      "Human kind cannot bear very much reality" ~T.S. Eliot
    44. Re:Excellent by forkazoo · · Score: 1

      Because I've heard the exact same thing from people who actually believe it and have done it at their job. It is a comment made by a young, inexperienced person (I can't call them an administrator) who doesn't have the experience to understand the problems with doing this.

      I hesitate to admit it, because I'm worried people will assume that I'm like the joking OP, but there actually have been occasions where I decided to do a custom kernel for a production box. Two occasions. And, one of them was actually for "maximum performance."

      Of course, that was on 486-class hardware sued in an embedded application that had an absurdly small amount of RAM. I figured out what hardware was in the system, and built a kernel with only enough drivers to run what was needed for our application. I even disabled kernel loadable module support, and made everything built-in. The result was that I saved something like a half a Megabyte of RAM, or something similarly tiny. But, it was just enough to make everything work. With a stock kernel, the machine was incapable of playing our MP3's in real time - it started swapping itself shitless. With the custom kernel, it worked just fine.

      The conservative sysadmin in me still feels a little dirty about that box, even though it was many years ago. The secret hax0r in me still feels l33t for demonstrating an ability to make any box serve my purpose, no matter how small.

    45. Re:Excellent by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      You would not run production stuff on a windows release would you?

      There, fixed that for ya... ^^

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    46. Re:Excellent by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Noone? Is that the brother of Chuck Norris? Noone Norris?

      Because Chuck Norris WAS born with a black belt. A black belt at EVERYTHING. Even at things where having a black belt doesn’t make any sense. Like yelling. Yes, Chuck Norris has a BLACK. BELT. FOR. YELLING! ;)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    47. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/noone

      Stop trolling. We don't care.

    48. Re:Excellent by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      There is no truth whatsoever in what you say.

      The most likely explanation is that you were a very bad Linux administrator.

    49. Re:Excellent by hansamurai · · Score: 1

      That was a great troll and I look forward to the parody posts in the future.

    50. Re:Excellent by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      inexperienced != dumb.

      We all start inexperienced and gain experience over time. Dumbness doesn't change much over time.

      Look up words you are unsure of at dictionary.com.

    51. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as someone mentioned earlier, the new 2.6.34 kernel comes with built in wooooosh-overflow protection!

    52. Re:Excellent by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Pretty much the same reason that smart people use CentOS and not Fedora for servers. Or RHEL if you are paying.
      You don't update servers for new features. You update them for security and bug fixes. Odds are you have no need for any new features on a production server. What you need is for it to keep working.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    53. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod the parent down, he said something positive about Microsoft... Where the f*** does he think he is???

    54. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IIS on the other hand has no chance against nginx and LightHTTPD.

    55. Re:Excellent by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Some of those features like vast improvements to NFS are worth upgrading for on some machines, but as I still have a few RHEL3 machines I agree with you on most points.

    56. Re:Excellent by dbIII · · Score: 1

      That's a better joke that the one that started the thread.
      Oh wait, you were serious?
      It's best not to sing the praises of such things as IIS and MS Exchange without actually experiencing how to administer the things. You can spot an experienced MS Exchange admin by the way they don't sing the praises of the thing, the way they sit it behind something else to handle the filtering and backup requirements and by the way that even in small sites they have redundant MS Exchange servers so that their users don't get hit by outages. It is the most fragile production MTA in use on the planet, but of course you put up with that due to the pile of other stuff that locks you into MS Exchange.
      The IIS thing is just sheer fanboy ignorance and there is no excuse for even that since apache will run on the same platform anyway.

    57. Re:Excellent by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Not really, the assumptions from one setting just don't work in another. Some people will try to find a book or google long before they try "command -h" or "man command" since they are not used to the documentation being there. Also there are far too many projects where the documentation isn't there at all or is totally pointless - eg. grub for the first few years or almost anything associated with gnome.
      While some things can be sorted out in seconds by looking at the comments in the first few lines of the source code you'll find that someone from a pure GUI admin environment would have given up with a tantrum before they got that far and I can't entirely blame them.
      Also there is the blatantly obvious that everyone is a very bad *nix administrator until they become a good one. Those of us that are good at it made our stupid mistakes on systems nobody else saw or cares about, just as good MS Windows admins have development boxes they can completely trash and reinstall to try things out.

    58. Re:Excellent by sonciwind · · Score: 1

      I don't think Microsoft has anything to be worried from Linux. The vast majority of users just plain can't use Linux. Linux isn't really growing in user base and what little growth it has is going to peak if it hasn't already unless some drastic changes are made to the operating system to make it easier to use. Don't get me wrong, I'm in favour of Linux FOS just isn't the right model for competing with funded OSes. Apple on the other hand...

    59. Re:Excellent by sjames · · Score: 1

      I can install Linux on a server with no questions asked. If the server has IPMI or is connected with serial and a remote power switch, I can install Linux remotely, even if all I have is a PPP connection through a 1200 baud modem. When I am developing, I can trivially set up any spare Linux desktop machine as a test server, also no questions asked. When I'm done with it, it's still a desktop machine with nothing missing. I never even have to think about my server being in compliance with the license. The primary user interface is Turing complete.

    60. Re:Excellent by nacturation · · Score: 1

      Successful troll is successful, I guess. Well done.

      Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from trolling.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    61. Re:Excellent by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      He's not talking about Windows/Linux servers. He's talking about Windows/Linux users.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    62. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're doing communication, Exchange is great.

      If you're doing Microsoft only communication the way Bill intended, Exchange is really great. If you want to use some new untested technologies like IMAP, exchange really, really sucks.

      This comment shouldn't be taken as a slight: I think the quality of Microsoft products is pretty damn good -- The Windows-only network is just the price you pay for that quality. The only reason I commented is that you didn't mention that price: for me it is the main reason why "linux is better than windows".

    63. Re:Excellent by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Except I did mention the price.

      The thing is, what most Linux people don't realize, is that the price for Microsoft products is pretty goddamned cheap when compared to almost any other cost of doing business. So while it's true that Linux is a cheaper solution, it's still not cheap enough for most organizations.

      (Here's a hint, though: if you want to increase Linux adoption, increase Linux's usability. Both for server configurations and client configurations. When Linux experts aren't demanding as high of salaries, then the cost equation drifts back to neutral and you'll have a lot more companies pulling the trigger on Linux installs.)

    64. Re:Excellent by WNight · · Score: 1

      The thing with Linux servers, is if you learn to do things the way they work, you're fine-- you need "telepathy" with whoever wrote the software, because it's nothing but dozens of undocumented assumptions.

      It's funny, I'd have said with Linux you need persistence and with Windows you need telepathy.

      I always had a terrible time configuring Windows (XP) to play video (as opposed to an empty magenta window) on my projector. It wasn't just a matter of changing the settings and exiting, you had to change them, go into the nvidia tab, make a change, cancel it, and then hit apply in the main settings window. (Or slightly different...) For some reason neither control panel fully worked alone, only this specific combo of the two.

      The only clue was a slightly longer flicker when it really applied settings as compared to when it didn't. The specific incantation was discovered accidentally and took forever to reproduce the first few times.

      With Linux you at least usually get an error message you can search for.

      I guess I prefer a system that I know I can get working if I try to one that should work but is totally opaque when it does not.

    65. Re:Excellent by WNight · · Score: 1

      Thanks to the roll-your-own mentality and the prevalence of people who build custom kernels it's not half as risky as it seems. If you were going through making your own edits on production servers, that's risky, if you just use make menuconfig to turn off stuff you won't use it's as close to risk-free as you can get.

      Besides, everything needs testing, even the vanilla distro. Most people talking about how trusting custom kernels is crazy probably don't fully test their apps before deployment on a stock kernel.

      As an example of a non-kernel way to screw things up... I was wrapping up a contract and one of the last-minute questions was how to keep a cron job from hurting the realtime performance. I said "nice it" and was out the door. Three months later I was back, diagnosing random hard lockups. Bet you can guess where this was going... Instead of nicing the cron job up they niced all of their software down, a lot. Even the non-essentials.

    66. Re:Excellent by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      And last time I used Linux it wouldn't freakin' send jack to the projector at all without a reboot. And if you put the laptop to sleep, it'd crash when it tried to wake up.

      LET'S HAVE A WAR OF THE ANECDOTES! Har har har har!

      I guess I prefer a system that I know I can get working if I try to one that should work but is totally opaque when it does not.

      When I used Linux, I didn't get any more error messages from apps than I did from Windows apps. Usually they just crashed and made a core dump. I think you're deluding yourself a bit here.

      But none of that has anything to do with my original statement, as I wasn't talking about the stability of the system-- both Linux and Windows are rock-solid, there's no point in comparing stability.

      I was talking about how you need to know about 26 completely different formats of config file to make your goddamned Linux server do what you want in the first place. Most of which had either no documentation. And the ones that had documentation, didn't have examples of how to use the most common features, rendering them mostly useless. I can't keep that kind of shit in my head. More power to you if you can.

      Sure, OS X and Windows have assloads of config files, but:
      1) There's a GUI to edit them (unless you're doing something really, really obscure)
      2) All the config files are the same format: XML

      Could I *get* Linux working? Yes, I could. I did for several years. Was it extremely unpleasant and time-consuming? Yes, it was.

    67. Re:Excellent by WNight · · Score: 1

      LET'S HAVE A WAR OF THE ANECDOTES! Har har har har!

      Your mental instability is showing.

      But none of that has anything to do with my original statement, as I wasn't talking about the stability of the system

      You must have mistaken my post for one where I said something about stability.

      I simply thought it was funny because the same (type of) UI issues make me feel like Windows requires telepathy.

      And last time I used Linux it wouldn't freakin' send jack to the projector at all without a reboot. And if you put the laptop to sleep, it'd crash when it tried to wake up.

      Oh cute, you decided to have your little war.

      Sure, OS X and Windows have assloads of config files [...] a GUI to edit them (unless you're doing something really, really obscure)[...] All the config files are the same format: XML

      The registry didn't seem plaintext last I checked (Win XP). Nor does Regedit really count as a GUI more than Firfox's about:config does.

      I was talking about how you need to know about 26 completely different formats of config file to make your goddamned Linux server do what you want in the first place.

      Yeah, I get it.

      I was talking about how this particular UI element was not like the others, requiring me to know the specific bugs/features of all the software inside out to do something. If I hit 'apply' like in other dialogs, nothing would happen.

      Most of which had either no documentation. And the ones that had documentation, didn't have examples of how to use the most common features, rendering them mostly useless.

      I've never seen anything except APIs be well documented, anywhere. Extensively documented as if they were paid by the word, but never well.

      However, the syntax of config files is usually pretty simple. A very small percentage of X config problems are because of a malformed file.

      The difficulty comes in knowing what to put in the file, or which options to select, and it's the same across UIs.

      I can't keep that kind of shit in my head. More power to you if you can.

      That might be your problem, trying. I don't remember the format of a cron file, I look at the comment at the top of the file.

      However, I had to simply remember that this particular wonky UI element worked that way. That's what I see as requiring the telepathy. (Well, prescience I guess, but...)

  5. I'm not impressed by justleavealonemmmkay · · Score: 1, Funny

    Windows reached version 3.0 some 20 years ago...

    1. Re:I'm not impressed by dropadrop · · Score: 0

      I agree, a major change is needed to make Linux more convincing. I vote the next kernel be numbered 10.2.35. This should prove to everyone that Linux is mature, and ready for the desktop.

    2. Re:I'm not impressed by lena_10326 · · Score: 0

      Kernel version != OS version

      --
      Camping on quad since 1996.
    3. Re:I'm not impressed by Zedrick · · Score: 1, Informative

      Very informative, but I'm pretty sure he was making a joke.

    4. Re:I'm not impressed by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Windows reached version 3.0 some 20 years ago...

      My operating system has reached stable version 23.2. Take that!

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    5. Re:I'm not impressed by lena_10326 · · Score: 1

      Very informative, but I'm pretty sure he was making a joke.

      And I was critiquing his (unfunny) joke.

      --
      Camping on quad since 1996.
    6. Re:I'm not impressed by hoboroadie · · Score: 2, Funny

      AOL 9.5 is far more advanced.

      --
      They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
    7. Re:I'm not impressed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahahahahaha. Loser.

    8. Re:I'm not impressed by mister_playboy · · Score: 1

      Windows Server 2008 laughs at it from on high.

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    9. Re:I'm not impressed by jpate · · Score: 1

      and blag linux 90001 cannot hear the laughs!

  6. Shucks... by nicknamesarefunny · · Score: 0

    That means my Ubuntu is going to break again ... :(

    1. Re:Shucks... by djdanlib · · Score: 1

      If only a more cutting-edge Linux distribution were to emerge... ;)

  7. GPU switching by TheLink · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > Some laptops have two GPUs, a low-power and inefficient GPU and a high-power and powerful GPU. Users should be able to switch to one or another at runtime. In this version, Linux adds support for this feature. You need to restart X, though.

    How do you restart X without affecting all your GUI apps? If you can't restart X without bringing down your GUI apps, I don't see the point for the target audience.

    For some people, "only having to restart X" will only save a bit of time over rebooting the whole laptop, reconfiguring bios etc.

    --
    1. Re:GPU switching by TeknoHog · · Score: 3, Informative

      How do you restart X without affecting all your GUI apps? If you can't restart X without bringing down your GUI apps, I don't see the point for the target audience.

      If you are using something like Gnome or KDE, it can probably save your GUI session. Individual applications will have to deal with their contents, but many of them already do that. At least Firefox and Openoffice can restore their sessions after being terminated.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    2. Re:GPU switching by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Well, AFAIK, until veeery recently (Still beta I think) you basically have to do the same on windows. Close all apps and restart the desktop.

    3. Re:GPU switching by skynexus · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you can't restart X without bringing down your GUI apps, I don't see the point for the target audience.

      For some people, "only having to restart X" will only save a bit of time over rebooting the whole laptop, reconfiguring bios etc.

      Not all laptops have a BIOS configuration that allows you to choose the GPU (ASUS UL series for instance). On mine, I had to change the SATA operation mode to have the second GPU work, but this in turn meant a severe performance degradation on my SSD. Without that (deficient) improvisation, I would not have been able to use the second GPU at all!

      Besides, logging out of your desktop and then logging in again is surely better than what you suggest?

    4. Re:GPU switching by Kjella · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Good question, but wrong project. The kernel is only responsible for initializing, suspending, resuming and lately modesetting of the hardware and it seems that is possible now. There probably needs to be some userspace code to pull information from one GPU and load it into the other but that's for the xorg server to do. They're probably working on it but it won't be in a Linux (the kernel) release announcement.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    5. Re:GPU switching by ettlz · · Score: 1

      The kernel is only responsible for initializing, suspending, resuming and lately modesetting of the hardware and it seems that is possible now.

      Plus managing GPU memory allocation. But yes, this is probably something to be added to XRandR, or some other protocol extension. (What would happen to normal, non-X virtual consoles, though? This might require some more stuff in the kernel.)

    6. Re:GPU switching by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Well, AFAIK, until veeery recently (Still beta I think) you basically have to do the same on windows. Close all apps and restart the desktop.

      Don't know about other configs, but on laptop with ATI graphics and Windows 7 the switch between discrete and integrated graphics is seamless. No need to close anything down or restart anything, open windows stay open. It can also be set on auto, controlled by battery level. And it has been working like this at least since Windows 7 launched last October.

    7. Re:GPU switching by ledow · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying this is the solution, nor how it should be done, but you could conceivably run a "remote" X-Windows session on a virtual buffer on the laptop - connecting to it with another X-Windows client on the same machine - and then, when you "switch" GPU's, the restart of X-Windows will only affect the "client" viewing the real X-session but be transparent to the user because they'll reconnect to their original session.

      It's not a huge stretch of the imagination that the virtual buffer can pass off necessary acceleration / state to the client, whatever that happens to be. However, it's more likely that in a month's time every X Server on the planet will start supporting some sort of underlying client refresh whenever it detects a switch and will be seamless. It's *JUST* made it into a kernel, for goodness sake, don't expect client support until the authors actually have something to program against.

    8. Re:GPU switching by icebraining · · Score: 1

      I agree that's not as useful as it could be, if it was able to do it on the fly easily.

      But it could theoretically (I've never tried it) be done using Xmove, which "allows the movement of X Window System applications between different displays and the persistence of X applications across X server restarts".

      xmove lets the client disconnect from its current X server, and connect to a new one, at any time. The transition is completely transparent to the client. xmove works by acting as a proxy between the client and server. It is a "pseudoserver" which stores enough server state so that clients can connect to a new server without being disrupted.

    9. Re:GPU switching by FeepingCreature · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you are using something like Gnome or KDE, it can probably save your GUI session. Individual applications will have to deal with their contents, but many of them already do that. At least Firefox and Openoffice can restore their sessions after being terminated.

      In KDE, System Settings -> Advanced -> Session Manager -> On Login, Restore Manually Saved Session. After that, you can save your session state from the logout menu or, alternatively, using a shellscript that loops every 30s or so and does

      # KDE3
      dcop ksmserver ksmserver saveCurrentSession
      # or KDE4
      dbus-send --dest=org.kde.ksmserver /KSMServer org.kde.KSMServerInterface.saveCurrentSession

    10. Re:GPU switching by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      X clients could just wait for the X server to start up again and connect to it. This can be implemented transparently in the GUI toolkits. I have no idea why they don't do this already.
      Currently it's like your browser crashing when a web server goes down which is kind of stupid.

    11. Re:GPU switching by TheLink · · Score: 1

      > Besides, logging out of your desktop and then logging in again is surely better than what you suggest?

      Where did I suggest people do that? To me such a kernel feature is useless till the rest of the "Linux Desktop" bunch work together and produce something like this:

      http://www.anandtech.com/show/3709/gfxcardstatus-brings-2010-macbook-pro-gpu-switching

      Yes the kernel bunch probably have to do this feature first, but for decades the X server going down has caused X applications to lose unsaved data and basically not work well, and for those decades it still has not been fixed. So far the applications individually workaround such crappiness. Which only makes it a bit less crappy.

      --
    12. Re:GPU switching by renoX · · Score: 1

      What about the 'shared memory' extension?
      I think that it's used by many toolkit communicating with the X server to improve performances..

    13. Re:GPU switching by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Yes this kernel feature probably needs to be done first, but for decades people have had to manually save data before restarting X, without the X developers ever fixing that. Some apps have worked around this problem, but if the X bunch use that as an excuse to not fix things it's going to stay crap and this kernel feature will be mostly useless.

      It doesn't affect me anymore, I use Linux mainly for servers. So I don't really care who is responsible, I'm just putting on a virtual "Steve Jobs" turtleneck and saying overall it still sucks, the problem is far from fixed yet, and it sure isn't "insanely great".

      In comparison here's the state of things for:
      OSX: http://www.anandtech.com/show/3709/gfxcardstatus-brings-2010-macbook-pro-gpu-switching

      Windows: http://www.osnews.com/story/22850/NVIDIA_Unveils_Optimus_Seamless_GPU_Switching

      --
    14. Re:GPU switching by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      I agree that's not as useful as it could be, if it was able to do it on the fly easily.

      But it could theoretically (I've never tried it) be done using Xmove, which "allows the movement of X Window System applications between different displays and the persistence of X applications across X server restarts".

      xmove lets the client disconnect from its current X server, and connect to a new one, at any time. The transition is completely transparent to the client. xmove works by acting as a proxy between the client and server. It is a "pseudoserver" which stores enough server state so that clients can connect to a new server without being disrupted.

      The downside to this kind of approach is that applications need to communicate via this X proxy all the time, just to reap the benefits in those cases where the X server must be restarted... I don't know if this would impact performance, but it does seem like an unnecessary overhead. Though if you're using a compositing window manager (compiz, etc.) then you've already got this overhead, so I guess the feature could be inserted there if it's not already present.

      Somebody else mentioned the idea of making migration between X servers a feature of the client (application) - I think that would be a very nice feature to have - tell a running X application to disconnect from the X server (without terminating) or start a new display on another X server. And if done at the toolkit level, a lot of apps would get this feature "for free"... But I think the real solution is to simply add support in the X server to reinitialize the display (i.e. for different hardware) without killing the X server itself.

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    15. Re:GPU switching by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Actually, Firefox and Thunderbird can’t really. They are really weird later, and some things don’t quite work right. I had data loss because of it, and hence can’t use it.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    16. Re:GPU switching by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I don't know how it is specifically with respect to such switches, but one neat thing about Vista/7 is that they can swap video drivers on the fly, with no need to restart anything or close any apps. In fact, you see this in action every time you update a driver - screen switches to text mode for a second or so, and then graphical mode comes back up on a new driver. I don't see why it couldn't do switching between discrete/integrated in exact same way.

    17. Re:GPU switching by nbehary · · Score: 1

      Not that I'm 100% sure, but in X everything displaying on the screen is a child process to the server in some way. It's probably not that simple since, thinking about it, remote apps would be completely different, but from experience they don't like losing their display. Regardless, it's probably very built into how X Window works, and was designed to. I'm not sure it could be fixed without going to something completely different, and that has yet to work out.

  8. Hurrah - now I'll get pre-built nVidia drivers! by IBBoard · · Score: 1

    I put an openSUSE Build Service version of the .34RC kernel on my new desktop because it fully supported the new Core i5 I'd just installed. Down-side was that there weren't any pre-built nVidia drivers because it wasn't a final kernel yet. Hopefully nVidia will start building the drivers in their repo so that I can move to a repo for my drivers :)

  9. The most exciting thing is by Advocadus+Diaboli · · Score: 5, Interesting

    that this kernel already got device IDs for next years Intel hardware. This is something completely new, since Intel so far had a much more closed policy and wouldn't have told device IDs prior to the chipset release.

    Now there is a really good chance that driver code will make it into the distribution kernels until the new hardware will be released for mass production. So the chances that brand new hardware will work without any flaws in 2011 are higher than ever before.

    Thanks to Intel for this change in their policy. This was a small step for Intel (since everybody "knows" that they will release new chips every year) but a giant leap for providing Linux hardware compatibility right "out-of-the-box".

    1. Re:The most exciting thing is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry but when was the last time Linux could not detect your CPU? I think priority for these sort of things should be with wifi cards, gpus etcetera.

    2. Re:The most exciting thing is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Intel has been active with the linux kernel for a number of years and done this sort of thing for a long time. Where have you been?

  10. Production Bleeding Edge == 2.6.32 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    2.6.32 is what you should consider bleeding edge. 2.6.27 would be safe.

  11. Trim by djfake · · Score: 1

    I believe that 2.6.34 will natively support TRIM, which will keep most second generation SSDs running clean. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIM/

    --
    www.itjerk.com
    1. Re:Trim by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Native support for ATA discard (better known as TRIM in the Windows world) appeared in 2.6.27, unless I'm mistaken.
      Support for individual file systems depends on how quickly the FS devs have been able to add their part, but some distros have had working discard with their default file systems for a while now. At far lower kernel versions than 2.6.34 :-)

    2. Re:Trim by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

      My wife trims, which keeps her SSD running clean.

      --
      I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  12. Whooosh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Something just flew way overhead....

  13. Re: RT2500 support by kv9 · · Score: 0, Troll

    if you want stable and good wireless support you should use OpenBSD (go ahead linuxfags, mod me down). HTH.

  14. In reading kernel changelogs... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm always amused by at least one strange juxtaposition of the big-serious-enterprise-server stuff that the corporate devs are most interested in and the oddball hobby projects that can get included as well, so long as they follow the kernel process.

    In this case, I think it was all the "multi-petabyte scaleable filesystem, esoteric btrfs improvements, kernel virtualization networking stuff, gamecon: add rumble support for N64 pads" that did it.

    1. Re:In reading kernel changelogs... by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Maybe a stupid question, but why does rumble support for N64 pads have anything that goes in the kernel? Doesn't Linux have any kind of abstraction layer for game controllers?

    2. Re:In reading kernel changelogs... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure exactly. The trend for modern oddball devices seems to be doing them in userspace with a libUSB driver. That isn't really a huge issue with game controllers, though, because virtually all of the modern ones are either USB HID or bluetooth HID, possibly with funny connectors(or, in the case of the Xbox360, some proprietary wireless protocol; but the PC dongle is, I believe, USB HID). For such modern devices, Linux does effectively have abstraction layers, either USB HID, or libUSB + userspace component.

      The "gamecon" module depends on "parport", though, so it would appear to be the place where oddball legacy controllers that can be bit-banged into working with a parallel port; but do not speak any PC-standard bus, go. Given that the parallel port is on its way out, as are most of these oddball controllers(either just wearing out, or having adapters that turn them into USB HID devices released, easy enough to find on ebay and similar), it wouldn't surprise me if no elegant "libparport" analog to libUSB exists for doing this in userspace and that there is basically no impetus in favor of one, given that this is basically just a hobby problem, and one for which relevant hardware isn't getting any younger....

    3. Re:In reading kernel changelogs... by Enleth · · Score: 1

      That went into evdev, I guess, which is an abstraction layer for all input devices. Most probably just a 0 changed to 1 in some device ID table to tell evdev to relay rumble events to the pad (which might not be the default to, e.g., prevent dumb pads from locking up). Just a guess, though.

      --
      This is Slashdot. Common sense is futile. You will be modded down.
    4. Re:In reading kernel changelogs... by deadwood · · Score: 1

      I will argue that this is the feature that will get adults interested in Linux. 12.4. Input Add driver for TWL4030 vibrator device (commit) http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_34 I'd like to see Windows support the mighty TWL4030!

    5. Re:In reading kernel changelogs... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      It's a pity that the TWL4030 is rather less interesting than it sounds. Unless "power and performance management" is some banal-yet-slightly-intimidating BDSM euphemism...

    6. Re:In reading kernel changelogs... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the abstracted layer and the device driver are both still parts of the kernel.
      Most linux kernels are modular so it will just load both the abstracted layer and the device driver if needed just as the NT kernel brings in the device drivers it needs.

  15. This all well and good, but... by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

    does it run Linux?

    Oh wait!

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1. Re:This all well and good, but... by DeBaas · · Score: 1

      does it run Linux?

      Yes it does, and if your systems supports it can even run Windows....

      --
      ---
  16. There's a hot GPU offloading support as well by Cyberax · · Score: 2, Informative

    There's experimental support for 'hotswitching' called 'PRIME' (for obvious reasons :) ).

    See here: http://airlied.livejournal.com/71734.html

    1. Re:There's a hot GPU offloading support as well by Maarx · · Score: 1

      There's experimental support for 'hotswitching' called 'PRIME' (for obvious reasons :) ).

      http://xkcd.com/541/

  17. And where is Version 2.8 or 3.0? by krischik · · Score: 1

    So version 2.6 is is not at fix level 34. Will there ever be another minor or even mayor version?

    1. Re:And where is Version 2.8 or 3.0? by Luke+has+no+name · · Score: 1

      From what I understand, the next major change to the kernel (in terms of HUGE changes) would be 2.7. Although people change their minds and Linus might say to put it at 3.0.

    2. Re:And where is Version 2.8 or 3.0? by baka_toroi · · Score: 1

      I don't know anything about Linux, bur I thought odd numbers (2.odd) indicated a beta/alfa/beingTested version...

    3. Re:And where is Version 2.8 or 3.0? by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      I don't know anything about Linux, bur I thought odd numbers (2.odd) indicated a beta/alfa/beingTested version...

      2.6 changed that. Now development happens in smaller increments between 2.6.x and 2.6.x+1, which is much more manageable than getting an entire 2.odd into a stable 2.even. AFAIK, the really stable versions are 2.6.x.y, because the .y are mainly bugfixes to the newly developed 2.6.x. These bugfixes are released in parallel with the development of 2.6.x+1.

      This also means that 2.6.x style numbering may go on for quite some time, unless there are some huge compatibility changes that probably mean a 3.0.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    4. Re:And where is Version 2.8 or 3.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll put you on the mailing list for Linux: Municipal Government Edition, Mr. Mayor. I think that one is set to come out after Lucid Lynx.

  18. i would really like to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what kind of difference does vt-x and the vt-io make, should i expect near native performance? or just a marginal difference. i dont get it cause ive got both of the above features, according to /proc/cpuinfo ive got a;
    Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU P9500

    please refer me to, or directly explain as much as you can. i understand up to protected mode at the asm level (gdt's ldt's tss's pagetables etc and the way io at a higher ring is checked against a bit table)

    and when i use vmware workstation i usually leave the option relating to binary translation on automatic, but ive experiment with turning on the vtx/amd equivalent specifically etc, and just havnt seen a big improvement. btw im (trying to) run the IT dept provided xp direct partition (i know there are warnings this can be dangerous but the partition is backed up dd style) under a ubuntu x64 9.10 host. the machine has 4gig of 800ddr2 ram. i expected decent performance but im just not seeing the performance i see in youtube videos, let alone the ability to run direct x 9 stuff at near native perf, yet ive seen people do it in youtube. what am i doing wrong?. any tips ? ive found the biggest improvement comes from giving the virtual machine less memory. of course it could all be because the xp has mcafee set to scan every file on access and this might be expected to make anything crawl. sigh, we're only given local-admin accounts and so we cannot disable this overzealous virus scanning) thank deity my supervisor approves me operating under linux where i have the intel noncomercial compilers and mkl, mathematica and matlab, and they are worth every cent of their respective licences (well the intel compilers suites are free).

    i heart linux. but it would be nice if vmware and in particular unity mode worked like i dreamed it might, so i could use the occasional app that has no counterpart and wont work in wine.

  19. kernel wifi by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

    And three of my four wifi cards still probably don't work :-(

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    1. Re:kernel wifi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if they are broadcom then you are correct. Broadcom and ATI won't be getting any more of my money.

  20. Details details by TheLink · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When I last used KDE years ago, that didn't work so well. For instance, my ssh connections weren't restored. And even for KDE apps the session saving thing didn't save everything.

    You may ask "why should SSH connections be restored?" and I'll reply: why should my apps and connections go down in the first place just because X goes down?

    Heck even in windows when I kill "explorer.exe" my apps still keep running. I know it's not the same thing, but who cares when all the fanatics keep saying Linux is so stable, but when X goes down, I lose stuff.

    In my experience a cli-based Linux system may be more stable than windows XP, but X can be less stable than Windows XP SP2/SP3. I've got X to lock up or abend a fair number of times, and have had to restart X, this causes me to lose unsaved work. For a Desktop User, it matters little if the rest of the O/S is still running merrily when X goes down and takes the GUI apps along with it.

    Yes I could use stuff like "screen" instead and treat X as a glorified interface to multiple screen sessions, but that's pathetic.

    --
  21. odd version numbers by krischik · · Score: 1

    That what I heard too. But then I also heard that "they" haven given up on it.

  22. Re: RT2500 support by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

    I don't quite understand your point, could you use use a car analogy to clarify it?

    --
    There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
  23. Now I am ready for gnome 3.0. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This kernel adds support for the Mobility Radeon HD 4300 Series of GPU. I will finally be able to run gnome-shell, and see what all the hype is about.

  24. LogFS sounds promising by MattBD · · Score: 1

    I think LogFS seems like a great idea. It's kind of ridiculous that flash memory is normally formatted as FAT, a filesystem that predates the invention of flash memory, just because it's the only one supported by virtually every OS. I'm sure it must hobble a lot of flash-based devices such as MP3 players. Of course, since LogFS is GPL, support is unlikely to be ever provided out of the box in Windows or OS X, so I imagine FAT will continue to hold sway, unless the LogFS developers were to make it available under another license as well. Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge fan of the GPL in general, but I think for something like this they'd benefit from BSD or MIT licensing it.

  25. Imagine by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

    Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these things!

  26. Whooooooosh by formfeed · · Score: 1

    Ok, I get it!

    While I look at "whooooooosh" and see it spelled with only one o (like this: "whooooooosh") ,
    someone else might look at it and see, let's say, seven o-eses.

  27. Let's not forget Loooooooorentz contraction by spazdor · · Score: 1

    Not only that, but if the joke flies by at a significant fraction of the speed of light, individual O's will appear flattened and compressed respective to their height!

    --
    DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!