Slashdot Mirror
Linux Kernel 2.6.35 Released
eldavojohn writes "Linus has announced the release of 2.6.35 for people to download and test after he found not a lot of changes between this week and last. The big features to look out for include: 'Transparent spreading of incoming network traffic load across CPUs, Btrfs improvements, KDB kernel debugger frontend, Memory compaction and Support for multiple multicast route tables' as well as various performance and graphics improvements. Linus also praised the community saying that 'regression changes only' after rc1 improved this time around and gave numbers to back it up saying 'in the 2.6.34 release, there were 3800 commits after -rc1, but in the current 35 release cycle we had less than 2000.' Good to see the process is becoming more refined and controlled after the first release candidate — hopefully there's no impending burnout."
Commit suicide.
Hello,
As a consultant for several large companies, I'd always done my work on
Windows. Recently however, a top online investment firm asked us to do
some work using Linux. The concept of having access to source code was
very appealing to us, as we'd be able to modify the kernel to meet our
exacting standards which we're unable to do with Microsoft's products.
Although we met several technical challenges along the way
(specifically, Linux's lack of Token Ring support and the fact that we
were unable to defrag its ext2 file system), all in all the process
went smoothly. Everyone was very pleased with Linux, and we were
considering using it for a great deal of future internal projects.
So you can imagine our surprise when we were informed by a lawyer that
we would be required to publish our source code for others to use. It
was brought to our attention that Linux is copyrighted under something
called the GPL, or the Gnu Protective License. Part of this license
states that any changes to the kernel are to be made freely available.
Unfortunately for us, this meant that the great deal of time and money
we spent "touching up" Linux to work for this investment firm would
now be available at no cost to our competitors.
Furthermore, after reviewing this GPL our lawyers advised us that any
products compiled with GPL'ed tools - such as gcc - would also have to
its source code released. This was simply unacceptable.
Although we had planned for no one outside of this company to ever
use, let alone see the source code, we were now put in a difficult
position. We could either give away our hard work, or come up with
another solution. Although it was tough to do, there really was no
option: We had to rewrite the code, from scratch, for Windows 2000.
I think the biggest thing keeping Linux from being truly competitive
with Microsoft is this GPL. Its draconian requirements virtually
guarantee that no business will ever be able to use it. After my
experience with Linux, I won't be recommending it to any of my
associates. I may reconsider if Linux switches its license to
something a little more fair, such as Microsoft's "Shared Source".
Until then its attempts to socialize the software market will insure
it remains only a bit player.
Thank you for your time.
fucking hippy linux niggers
Bert64, see subject line above & I am wondering WHY you avoided noting that (not, I know why you did)! I'll explain it for others to avoid your 1/2 truths here:
By having to purchase a support contract for your open sores software? You're stuff's no longer REALLY "free" and it's actually quite deceptive advertising imo @ least to then say it's free. Also, by your now espousing having to PURCHASE something for your "Open SORES" stuff, well... face it: You're actually subverting a LARGE feature of what actually makes "Open SORES" (where errors are more easily found for both fixes and finding vulnerabilities (in the latter to use AGAINST IT, not just to fix them also)) attractive in being a money saving thing vs. commercially produced closed-source softwares.
No, the sword cuts BOTH ways here Bert64, & though you made a few good points, it was "FUNNY" how you avoided noting those support contracts for "Open SORES" stuff, co$t MONEY!
"A young whippersnapper, then. When you have a bit more experience of the real world you might start to understand just how many critical systems already run on Linux." - by 0123456 (636235) on Monday August 02, @03:06AM (#33107656)
LMAO - Oh, really? You'd be surprised at how many MORE run on say, Microsoft's Windows NT-based OS' as well as those from the likes of IBM for instance... & as to "young whippersnapper"?? LMAO, again, because I've actually been around these systems for over 28++ yrs. now, & for nearly 16 professionally as both a dev using multiple languages, tools, & OS' + as a network administrator as well (in addition to having done quite well in publication & technical contests for my works in commercial wares, such as MS' Tech Ed, 2yrs. in a row no less & in its hardest category). I also possess multiple degrees around this science... have you done the same to ALL of the above? Somehow, despite your attempted ad hominem attack upon myself, rather than disputing points I made (which is the last resort of trolls on both accounts mind you on your part), and attempting to act as if YOU were my "senior" in this art & science? I doubt it. As to wares written for defence contractors? Check with Raytheon and their artillery control wares written for the IRAQ conflict, because the poster I replied to mentioned working for defense contractors. Soldiers lives depend on it, and yes, it works, and it's written on the Windows platform, so... Better luck next time, troll.
LOL, see subject above, & this admission of the TRUTH from "Open SORES zealot #1" around here, in Bert64:
"Support contracts for *ANYTHING* cost money... - by Bert64 (520050) writes: on Monday August 02, @04:39AM (#33108002) Homepage
Funny you mention that NOW, but "StRaNgE" (not) how you avoided noting that in your first reply, eh? Again: "NOT"...
Bert64, but this was what gives away your "FrUsTrAtEd" & "FoAmInG @ tHe MoUtH" rage, lol, in this ad hominem attack by you:
"Over all, a very poor troll. I feel insulted to be trolled by you. - by Bert64 (520050) writes:bert@NosPAM.slashdot.firenzee.com> on Monday August 02, @04:39AM (#33108002) Homepage
Well, I got you to first of all admit that Linux and other "Open SORES" support contracts CO$t MONEY, and now to see you reduced to name tossing so... lol to you.
(Best you & yours had is name tossing and unjustified mod downs as well Bertie boy. Give up: You just do not have the intelligence to get the better of me and your name tossing adhominem attacks prove that much above, in your own words quoted no less!)
Poor performance on your part to have to try the "grammar and spellcheck" routine Bert64. It's the last resort of a troll and we all know it, unless you can show us that this is the "grammar & spellcheck section" of /. and, it's shown your frustration at being exposed in the oldest scam of all that "Open SORES" uses: Bert64 & Open SORES version of "FREE" is along the lines of BEER IS FREE, BUT THERE IS A $1,000 CHARGE FOR THE BOTTLE DEPOSIT Which is of course, complete bullshit and deceptive advertising. Stating others trolled you also only makes you look all the more frustrated at being outsmarted in being spotted in your rather sneaky omission and 1/2 truth in your not noting that Open SORES support contracts are NOT FREE and CO$T MONEY buddy. You got burned, as well as caught spouting your 1/2 truth "OPEN SORES FUD", and all you have is your name calling and mod downs Bert64. You're not smart enough to pull the wool over our eyes old boy, so face that fact, ok?
See subject, & neither does it make the BEER IS FREE BUT $1,000 BOTTLE RENTAL so-called "FREE" of OPEN SORES any better does it Bertie boy? No, it does not. Funny how you omitted that it costs for those support contracts for say, Linux though on your part (& since you have to pay to get Linux supported, it's not exactly "FREE" anymore is it, Bert? Nope, not really!)
Nor does it change the fact that finding security vulnerabilities to exploit in OPEN SORES any better either since it IS possessed of a freely available source which is far easier to find security vulnerabilities in than is closed source (where you must resort to either fuzzers or debuggers/disassemblers, which is far more difficult to do and more time consuming than reading actual sourcecode).
In the end, after your POOR "spell check" trolls and unjustified mod downs here??
LMAO - Man... Give up Bert64, because on your BEST day? I've always taken you to the cleaners in technical debate here, everytime...
APK
P.S.=>
"Go and read the original post." - by Bert64 (520050) writes: on Monday August 02, @04:52AM (#33108034) Homepage
Uhm, that changes what I said above HOW, Bertie? Oh, so you know?? I am posting this from KUbuntu 10.04 (iirc that's the build # of latest stable etc. I dl'd & used) so you can't call me a "closed source shill" etc. as you "Open SORES" trolls & shills often try to do, as well as FireFox (and have my other rig here running Free BSD's latest stable build in a few minutes too)... Plus, of course, my last system on Windows 7 (all 64 bit builds on ALL OS & systems here) - I am OPEN MINDED Bert, but at least I can state the ups & downs of them all, without omitting facts as YOU have in the support contract costs of LINUX! apk
"$1,000++ BOTTLE RENTAL FEE" for support contracts for Open SORES wares & OS, which in essence makes them NOT TOTALLY FREE!
So, so much for "FREE" per Bert64, and gee: Isn't it "ODD" that Bert64 omitted the costs involved on that end of things also?
Bert64 also neglected to mention that Open SORES, in being "Open SORES" that security vulnerabilities are easier to find and thus exploit against an Open SORES OS or ware because of it vs. closed source having to have either fuzzers or debuggers/disassemblers taken to it to do the same which means MORE TIME & harder to do in finding bugs against it also.
(Yes, when you point out truths about "Open SORES" here on /., all you get is more FUD, name tossing, grammar and spellchecks plus other ad hominem attacks taken to you as well as unjustified mod downs sent your way by these numerous alternate registered account using OPEN SORES TROLLS (like they fool anyone? LOL, we all know they do it in fact so they can mod themselves up and others down with their multiple registered accounts here)).
Better luck next time boys because you'll have a hell of a time disproving the points I just made here and also in other posts here as well.
See subject above, and all I have to say to that is this:
Ahem - BULLSHIT!
(I know this because I have seen kernel panics and application hangups or crashes on it)
Man, you have to LOVE how the zealots and fanboys of Linux won't admit that it has hassles also (and that it only does a fraction of what Windows does on a PC in terms of apps available for it and what not).
In regards to that then, well, I'd like to see someone explain WHY this documentation exists then:
Reboot Linux box after a kernel panic:
http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/reboot-linux-box-after-a-kernel-panic.html
Hmmm?
(Gotta love the Linux fanboys'/zealots' "straight-outta-pravda" BULLSHIT around here!)