Slashdot Mirror


Torvalds Bemoans Size of RC7 For Linux Kernel 3.5

alphadogg writes "A host of small modifications and a large number of system-on-a-chip and PowerPC fixes inflated the size of release candidate No. 7 for Version 3.5 of the Linux kernel, according to curator Linus Torvalds' RC7 announcement, made on Saturday. Torvalds wasn't happy with the extensive changes, most of which he said he received Friday and Saturday, saying 'not cool, guys' in the announcement. However, the occasionally combustible kernel curator didn't appear to view this as a major setback. 'Now, admittedly, most of this is pretty small. The loadavg calculation fix patch is pretty big, but quite a lot of that is added comments,' he wrote, referring to the subroutine that measures system workload."

3 of 158 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Why is this a story? by vlm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Linus bitches and moans about the size of every release candidate. Better that broken stuff gets fixed now rather than with an ever-lengthenng string of point releases after the fact.

    The kernel's always pushed the limits of memory, compilers... Here's a typical example from a little over 20 years ago from usenet

    From: torvalds@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Linus Benedict Torvalds)
    Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
    Subject: Re: Help, can't compile 0.95a!
    Date: 3 Apr 92 21:27:41 GMT
    Organization: University of Helsinki

    In article wjb@cogsci.cog.jhu.edu
    (Bill Bogstad) writes:
    >
    > I have a 8 Meg system and also am having problems compiling fork.c.
    >I would have thought that would have been sufficient....

    Ok, the problem isn't memory: it's gcc-1.40. For some strange reason
    the older gcc runs out of registers when optimizing some of the files in
    the linux source distribution, and dies. This one isn't the same bug as
    the "unknown insn" which was due to my hacks in the earlier 1.40 - this
    one seems to be a genuine gcc bug.

    Linux 0.95a is compileable with the older gcc if you just add the flag
    "-fcombine-regs" to the command line. In fact, the only thing you need
    to do is to remove a "#" from the makefiles: the line

    #GCC_OPT = -fcombine-regs

    should be uncommented, and gcc-1.40 will have no problems compiling the
    source. This was documented in some of the release-notes for 0.95, but
    I guess I forgot it for 0.95a.

    Why remove the flag in the first place I hear you say? Simply because
    gcc-2 doesn't understand -fcombine-regs, as it seems to do the
    optimizations even without asking. There are other things I had to
    change in the source to get gcc-2 to compile it, but this is the only
    problem that made the old gcc choke.

    With the advent of an official gcc-2.1 (this weekend?), people might
    want to change to that one: note however that gcc-2.1 is about twice as
    big as 1.40, so it's going to be slower on machines that swap... People
    with just 2M of mem might not want to upgrade (*). I like the changes
    to 2.1: the code quality seems to be a lot better (esp floating point).

    On a slightly related note: the as-binary in newgcc has been reported by
    several people to have problems. Getting as from the original
    gcc-distribution by me (gccbin.tar.Z) might be a good idea if you have
    problems with the newgcc version.

                    Linus

    (*) Even with only 2M of mem, using gcc-2 has it's good points. The
    shared libraries should cut down on memory use as well as loading time
    and disk-space use. Shared libraries work even with 1.40 if you know how
    to build them, but 2.1 does it all automatically...

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  2. Re:Hold on a second. by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It seems like part of what he's trying to point out here is that there may be developers trying to cram in what are really new features into 3.5 by declaring them bugs and pushing them into RC's, rather than waiting until the next release. This behavior wouldn't surprise me in the least.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  3. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Linus has always been bitchy.
    It is why Linux is the way it is now.

    If it wasn't for his bitchiness, it would be Windows. Yes, I am not kidding.
    There'd be ENTERPRIIIISE CODING brilliance in there, AKA useless bloat for stuff nobody should EVER, IN THE HISTORY OF EVER, have access to, and countless other things. (up YOURS Microsoft! )
    What's that, writing a driver are you? If it isn't fully descriptive in code, you're fired!
    What's that? You saved a huge number of cycles by using a Goto there? FIRED, we want more lines! (I'm not even kidding, Linus had to defend a Goto in a driver-level file, this is how mad this anti-Goto retardedness is these days, kids man)
    So on and so fourth.

    Hey, at least he isn't a Ballmer. Nobody can beat ol' monkey boy.
    Developers developers developers deve... oh go away developers we don't want you in Windows 8 anym... no sorry we were just kidding! ... honest!
    Linus is always solid.
    Without him, Linux would turn in to PHP. Look what happened to that. PHP is plain awful now. It started off with a good idea, then all the amateurs took control and ruined it. You don't want that now, do you?