Linus Chews Up Kernel Maintainer For Introducing Userspace Bug
An anonymous reader points out just how thick a skin it takes to be a kernel developer sometimes, linking to a chain of emails on the Linux Kernel Mailing List in which Linus lets loose on a kernel developer for introducing a change that breaks userspace apps (in this case, PulseAudio). "Shut up, Mauro. And I don't _ever_ want to hear that kind of obvious garbage and idiocy from a kernel maintainer again. Seriously. I'd wait for Rafael's patch to go through you, but I have another error report in my mailbox of all KDE media applications being broken
by v3.8-rc1, and I bet it's the same kernel bug. And you've shown
yourself to not be competent in this issue, so I'll apply it directly
and immediately myself. WE DO NOT BREAK USERSPACE! Seriously. How hard is this rule to understand? We particularly don't
break user space with TOTAL CRAP. I'm angry, because your whole email
was so _horribly_ wrong, and the patch that broke things was so
obviously crap. ... The fact that you then try to make *excuses* for breaking user space,
and blaming some external program that *used* to work, is just
shameful. It's not how we work," writes Linus, and that's just the part we can print. Maybe it's a good thing, but there's certainly no handholding when it comes to changes to the heart of Linux.
Winning friends and influencing people since 1983.
Seriously, who'd put up with this crap? There are nicer ways to make ones way through life.
It's just a kernel patch, nothing to be actually "angry" about. Why so emotional? And especially when it's somebody who is not an employee.
Just say, "It is our firm policy that we do not break XXX, even when any given developer wishes they could. If you wish to continue contributing, you must follow the policy. Please apply the fix ASAP and acknowledge your understanding of these conditions."
all get together and sit Shuttleworth in a room with Linus and lock the door for an hour after Linus has been forced to use Unity for a week? That would probably solve the problem. After what they did with Unity and then with the passing search terms out to the internet, I can't recommend Ubuntu, but through Ubuntu and MATE. They really screwed the pooch on that. They had the best chance at corporate desktop standardization but really lost it with forcing Unity on people. And yes, I have used it. It bites.
One Token Ring to Rule them All, One Search Engine to Find Them, One WAN to bring them in, and TCP/IP Bind them...
He's the head of Linux and he has some serious social issues!
Seriously, someone makes a coding mistake in a pre-release kernel, there's a heated e-mail chain about it, and now it's on /. Why?
I actually disaggree. This is not a private company where you are trying to spare people's feeling. It is a case of "you screw up, you get yelled at." Because it is a publicly managed project, the yelling happens in public. It also set the standard for every single other developper. The next time a user space bug is introduced. The kernel developer will not try to swipe it under the rug.
I am so tempted to kiss the guy! Linux can't have this type of _OBVIOUS_ audio sabotage at the kernel level if we expect game developers to ever make their products available on Linux. Linus NEEDS to reign this in, we just can't afford it. He is 110% right.
Keep the helm firm, man! That's exactly what we need!
Qybix
Qybix ----- I do not have a belief system; I'm an Anti-theist and proud of it! Saying that not believing in anything i
A leader need not be paying to be boss.
There are some people who you could site down with and explain things for two hours and they would still go away and do their own thing. IT is particularly full of people like this (and I'm aware of and try to avoid my own inclinations in this direction). Sometimes, you just have to make it clear that something is important and that means raising the temperature even as (and especially as) you remain in control internally.
This is also a valuable parenting skill. I don't think that that's entirely coincidental.
So it would assume that if the head of the Linux movement had rant like a child, I guess it's ok for all the other leaders of their projects, who don't have any leadership experience to follow this wonderful example.
Look Linus may be a great leader, but pompous crap like this doesn't belong. There's a reason why in management if you need to discipline/warn an employee, you do it in private not over the company mailing list.
That was my reading exactly. As a programmer, I've had to condition my responses to bug reports to move from, "What?! It's totally your fault!" to, "Let me investigate this on my end." It became fairly obvious from the get go that the patch made some changes that were overlooked in the patch. The patch commit message failed to give any reason or justification for the change (which was a 1 line change, possibly in a sea of other changes). Furthermore, the automated testing application that the patch submitter was using had a bug in it.
It's likely the testing apparatus said, "OMG! THIS ERROR VALUE IS WRONG!" Then, the submitter corrected it to fit the bad test. Honestly, while Rafael signed off on it, it would appear the submitter set him up the bomb, so to speak. Who would make a change like that without further investigation and then submit it is a serious question. I would hope the patch submitter is placed under some additional scrutiny.
All in all, Rafael took it in stride in his response. He also explained further, but appears to have capitulated that his initial reaction was wrong and that he should have fixed first, asked "Why are you using that, anyway?" later. Also, he should have never stated that, "So, on a first glance, this doesn't sound like a regression, but, instead, it looks that pulseaudio/tumbleweed has some serious bugs and/or regressions." It's quite obvious that changing not only what error code is returned but returning one that was literally impossible without telling anyone is a Bad Thing(TM).
As for Linus's style of management, I don't know. I mean, Rafael was way, way, way out of line with that statement I quoted. He really failed to grasp the situation, even after it was clearly spelled out for him.
All in all, I think he's learned his lesson and will be better for it. He seems to have taken it well enough, at least publicly. :-)
I wouldn't speak to anyone that way unless I never wanted to see them again. Shaming someone in public like this is a way to not only get them to quit, but to make a permanent enemy out of them.
What this tells me is that Linus is better suited to be a cult leader than a manager of any kind.
To be honest, I wish it happened more.
I _wish_ management where I am cared about quality at this level. It would be worth getting chewed out once in a while to know that stupid bugs are not tolerated.
Sometimes shit happens. Sorry for that.
Cheers,
Mauro
Wrong. Answer.
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
All in all, I think he's learned his lesson and will be better for it.
Abusing people who report to you teaches everyone in your organization that it is desirable to avoid reporting to you - either through avoiding you, getting you fired or through finding a different job. It also teaches everyone who reports to you that it is acceptable for them to be abusive too. It makes people perform poorly because they are now preoccupied with your idiosyncratic outbursts rather than just doing the work right. With lessons like these, you don't want anyone to learn them, but that's probably far too late when it comes to Linux - Linus' volatile behavior is nothing new. You don't correct a bad attitude by showing a bad attitude yourself. That aside, Linus didn't understand that the new error value return was not intended, so he was both abusive and also wrong about part of what was going on.
Celeb or not I'd tell Torvalds to kiss my ass. I thought maybe that was at the end of a conversation...nope, the guy asks a simple question , one that would have taken Torvalds all of 30 seconds to explain like a rational human being, and instead he goes instantly to 11 on the douchebag scale.
I don't give a flying fuck WHO it is, be it Torvalds or Ballmer or Cook or Ellison if someone acts like a total fucking douchebag they should be called out for it and I'm calling him out, Linus Torvalds you sir are a douchebag. you could have solved the whole fucking thing in under 30 seconds by simply explaining why "it must be thus" but instead just acted like a giant flaming prick, it was completely uncalled for, the other guy was acting complete civil and politely, therefor the asshole of the week award should be given to Torvalds for flying so completely off the handle when there was zero point in it.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
The guy deals with A LOT of bullshit on a daily basis, and this was a BS patch anyway. That would be the end of it if the dude didn't start coming up with excuses. If you know you're wrong, fucking say so and make things right.
Sometimes stupid people need to be told they are stupid, otherwise they wont stop being stupid.
I think it would be quite appropriate for Microsoft to track down the people responsible for Windows, and force those people to apologize to the rest of us.
The problem is that you cheap fucks don't want to pay for anything.
Lies. Check humblebundle.com, they show how much each OS spends (people are allowed to pay as much, or little, as they want). Currently:
Windows: $6.09
Mac: $7.83
Linux: $10.34
Linux has few users, but they are not cheap.
hobby OS.
Webservers, stock exchanges and electronics are run by hobbists, then.
Just like you could have made your point without saying: douchebag, ass, giant flaming prick, and asshole.
I don't give a flying fuck WHO it is, be it Torvalds or Ballmer or Cook or Ellison if someone acts like a total fucking douchebag they should be called out for it and I'm calling him out, Linus Torvalds you sir are a douchebag. you could have solved the whole fucking thing in under 30 seconds by simply explaining why "it must be thus" but instead just acted like a giant flaming prick, it was completely uncalled for, the other guy was acting complete civil and politely, therefor the asshole of the week award should be given to Torvalds for flying so completely off the handle when there was zero point in it.
Actually, the other guy, while being incompetent, was very manipulative, and it worked - with people like you. To be manipulative like that you have to have a lot of social intelligence, and that helps you to navigate situations in which your incompetence surfaces. Some people have little patience with such manipulations and fakery.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Bottom line, Linus has been in charge of the kernel for a couple of decades now, and his process is working. He doesn't flip out very often, so when he does, every who counts knows that some serious fuckups happened. And anyone who doesn't count (which in this case, almost certainly includes both you and me) can probably go fuck themselves if they don't like it.
Nobody in the world knows for sure how to manage a project like Linux. It is truly unprecedented. But Linus's way is working better than anyone would have expected two decades ago. If you want to second-guess him, feel free to start your own competing project and manage it your way. His way is working better than anything anyone else has ever tried, even if it's not "the best way".
Or it looks like someone had a temper tantrum because he's a celebrity and doesn't have to be decent to other people.
And the thing is, that happens. A lot. Even at microsoft. "That's the stupidest fucking thing I've ever heard!" - Bill Gates. And that was in Paul Allens book, and apparently an oft used phrase.
Linux lives and breathes on its contributors, if you make too many public scenes you can end up with a lot of important people and companies saying it's not worth it to contribute to, or it's not worth it to contribute to under Torvalds, that would be a very ugly mess for the entire industry. Worse still is if this sort of behaviour sets the tone for everyone else trying to be the next Linus, and they try to copy his to behavior (and that definitely happened at microsoft) and you end up with an organization full of asshole managers who no one wants to work for. At least microsoft can hold out the carrot of a fat paycheck to put up with it, Linux relies on people volunteering to help.
Granted, it's not really a shock that Torvalds likes to... speak his mind. That's part of his thing. Still, it poses a lot of questions about the sort of person who's going to be around to succeed him if he gets hit by a bus so to speak. Certainly Tim Cook and Steve Ballmer have not been able to find the right magic replacing their more famous bosses, and one would hope Linux manages better than Apple and MS have, admittedly, those jobs are completely different.
Seriously, if as an enthusiast I submitted a patch that broke user space and got a beat down from Linus I'd be a bit sad. If, as a PAID developer, I submitted a patch that broke user space AND THEN blamed the user space applications and got a beat down I'd wonder wtf am I doing writing software.
You never, ever, blame the end user for your fuck ups. Even more so when you changed the API/ABI and fucked it up yourself.
Linus is an ass, but when dealing with someone who goes full asshole on the user space devs over his fuck up, he was a justifiable ass.
I don't know why you were marked as a troll. I would have the same reaction as you. Doing something stupid is not a free ticket for people to be rude. Linus was unprofessional.
...and then it makes Linux as an operating system -- and everything that runs on it and depends on it, look bad...
While I agree that this incident does put Linux on the front pages in part of the Net, I seriously doubt the "look bad" part.
In fact, imho, this incident will generate more positive than negative for Linux.
Admins and users that are still sitting on the fence would take note, that Linus just don't take fuck as an excuse - and if anyone dares to fuck up like that fella he will get a public tongue lashing - and the top priority of Linux is to *NOT INTRODUCE ANY USERSPACE BUG*.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
This isn't backwards compatibility. It's the same basic rule we have to follow where I work: you DO NOT EVER make unannounced/unplanned changes that break the way other modules interact with yours. Period, end of line. Break that rule with any sort of regularity and you'll be looking for a job. If you need to make a change like that, it's on you to justify why and then to coordinate with everyone else to make sure everything that needs changed gets changed. It's not a hard rule to understand or to follow. If you can't, you have no business messing with an operating system kernel.
Doing something stupid is not a free ticket for people to be rude.
Doing something stupid doesn't. Doing something stupid, not apologizong for it, failing to fix it in a timely manner and then blaming the stupidity on other people's code - when kernel policy clearly state it's YOUR responsibility - is much closer to the free ticket, wouldn't you say?
Or it looks like someone had a temper tantrum because he's a celebrity and doesn't have to be decent to other people.
He cares more about the product being right than other peoples' opinion of him.
And the thing is, that happens. A lot. Even at microsoft. "That's the stupidest fucking thing I've ever heard!" - Bill Gates. And that was in Paul Allens book, and apparently an oft used phrase.
Sometimes the truth hurts.
Linux lives and breathes on its contributors, if you make too many public scenes you can end up with a lot of important people and companies saying it's not worth it to contribute to, or it's not worth it to contribute to under Torvalds, that would be a very ugly mess for the entire industry.
Nope. Linus has been Linus his whole life. This "story" isn't anything new. Oddly enough, Linux keeps marching onward, with plenty of contributors who are both volunteers and paid by various corporations to contribute work.
Worse still is if this sort of behaviour sets the tone for everyone else trying to be the next Linus, and they try to copy his to behavior (and that definitely happened at microsoft) and you end up with an organization full of asshole managers who no one wants to work for.
Again, the truth hurts. Projects like these don't tolerate stupidity well, especially given the fact that it's a community effort and there has to be a lot of lack of testing and communication on the part of the responsible party when something breaks like this. The price to be paid is twofold: (1) very public expressions of the harm caused by such issues, and (2) potential relief from duties related to the issue at hand, whether temporary or permanent in nature.
Granted, it's not really a shock that Torvalds likes to... speak his mind. That's part of his thing. Still, it poses a lot of questions about the sort of person who's going to be around to succeed him if he gets hit by a bus so to speak. Certainly Tim Cook and Steve Ballmer have not been able to find the right magic replacing their more famous bosses, and one would hope Linux manages better than Apple and MS have, admittedly, those jobs are completely different.
Step right up if you can do it better or know others who can. It takes strong leadership founded on the idea that others follow you primarily for you technical ability, and secondarily for your "soft skills" to manage a technical project of this scale. Sometimes people have problems replacing their famous bosses because while the old boss may have been widely regarded as an asshole, he was an effective asshole, and numbers (whether measured in uptime, lack of showstopping functional bugs, level of attention to security issues, or profit per quarter) don't lie.
All things considered, I saw far worse than this in my prior military service (Navy submarine force, ET-COM) in cases where somebody did something stupid that resulted in a systems failure, and oddly enough some aspects of this whole deal remind me a bit of organizational units in the services that pride themselves on putting job performance and technical ability first. Those who get butthurt about being dressed down are free to find something else to do with their time.
Write failed: Broken pipe
No, as most maintainers agree Tovolds was exactly right and has said the same thing at least 10'000 times on LKML, often with detailed reasoning.
One of the reasons that the kernel is excellent is Linus has GOOD TASTE.
That he dosn't suffer fools gladly is one of his better features, MFG, omb
So simply being a nice person is now manipulative because it makes people like you? Do you even realise what you're saying?
There is nothing nice about causing harm for no reason to other people (users in this case) while smiling and talking politely.
If somebody rear-ends my car at a light, they have caused me harm. Do I therefore get out of my car and start screaming at him to "punish" him for his sins? No, I simply call the police to have a report created, and exchange insurance info. It will no doubt cost the guy money, and his insurance company will no doubt give him incentive not to repeat the incident. But, the fact is that it was an accident - that is why we call them accidents.
People mess up - it is a defining characteristic of humanity. Sometimes they even mess up and don't realize that they messed up. If you can't deal with this, then go do the rest of the human race a favor and have yourself committed.
And as far as "for no reason" goes, read the entire thread. There actually was a reason for the patch, and the reason was a good one. The implementation was incorrect, but the intent was not malicious.
Uh, Linus might have good taste in patches, but he has horrible taste in human interaction. Anybody who doesn't think so has equally horrible taste.
The guy who made the commit wasn't a fool - he made a mistake. If he was a fool, then Linus was a fool to grant him commit access.
"many eyes" making the code work seem to be obsolete when you have a club that you have to be a member of before they take notice of you. Its always been this way in so many fields of human endeavour - if you're expecting the community around Linux to be different and based on technical excellence only then you have a lot to learn about people.
The trick is to acknowledge that you're not "one of them" and approach the task of submitting your patch like this - submit the patch as normal, and then contact Linus or someone with an email humbly telling them that you've noticed a little bug that slipped through and that you've submitted a patch that you think will fix the problem - once you have their attention enough to look at the fix, they'll be ready to accept it, as if it was something they'd noticed themselves. I guess that once you've done this a couple of times, they'd accept your future patches without review.
I know its not supposed to work that way, but it does... I'd be interested to know how you went about the submission process. It could be that they were just too busy to review all the patches that were submitted, so yours languished, un-noticed for so long.
Your analogy is flawed. It was the users that were rear-ended, not Torvalds. Torvalds is the judge throwing the book at the driver who rear-ended you when he keeps trying to say it was all *your* fault.
Nope. Linus has been Linus his whole life. This "story" isn't anything new. Oddly enough, Linux keeps marching onward, with plenty of contributors who are both volunteers and paid by various corporations to contribute work.
It's more than that.
Linux powers tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars worth of systems. It's unbelievably huge, and it's almost inconceivable that all of the megacorporations whose business depends so deeply on it didn't snatch control of the whole thing away from the lone kid who started it as a hobby project long ago. I mean, who would have predicted that even after it had become so important, Linux would still be maintained by the one guy who started it, rather than some joint committee of top-tier OS engineers -- probably dominated by IBM?
Not only is that not what's happened, but as far as I can see none of those megacorps even try to tell Linus what to do. They submit patches, humbly formatted and refactored into the form Linus wants, and they butter him up with conference tickets, free hardware and the like, and they even compete for the right to pay him a salary.
Why is that? Because whatever anyone says about him, his style, his attitude, his people skills or even his code... the results are fantastic. Linux not only works very well, it does so across an amazing variety of hardware platforms, and the design -- and Linus' good taste and fanatical attention to detail -- have proven to be able to support virtually any new idea that's worth implementing.
Love Linus or hate him... don't mess it up. Luckily, Linus is an egotistical bastard who doesn't care what anyone thinks anyway, so mere words aren't likely to change anything.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Seriously, if as an enthusiast I submitted a patch that broke user space and got a beat down from Linus I'd be a bit sad.
As an "enthusiast" your userspace-breaking patch would never have made it to Linus. It would have had to go through the maintainer of its respective subsystem -- and perhaps more than one -- who would have caught the problem and told you to fix it. Likely much more nicely.
What happened here was a senior, experienced submitter did something really dumb, and it was a huge problem because he was sufficiently trusted not to do such dumb things that there was no one watching closely enough to catch it. Linus doesn't have enough hours in the day to thoroughly review everything that comes through, he has to make judgment calls based on the degree of trust he has in the source. Mauro let him down in a big way, then compounded it by trying to make excuses for it.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Not to mention everybody is completely missing the point, which is thus:...the guy is working on a complex subsystem with some serious driver issues, and he made a mistake, so what? in a complex project mistakes are gonna happen. He points out that the behavior of a good portion of the drivers is exactly like what he wrote therefor Pulse is gonna break with all those drivers as well which is why he thinks its a Pulse problem, because the kernel guys didn't write ALL those drivers, and the Pulse locking is gonna be puking when it gets to ANY of those drivers, which are many.
ALL LINUS HAD TO DO was spend a lousy 30 seconds saying "That may be, but here is how you should go about this" and done, that's it, problem solved, explanation given, error corrected. Does he do this? Nope he goes total apeshit and acts like a five year old that had his toy broken and just goes fucking nuts, when the other guy was actually acting like a rational human being. I'm sorry but dramaqueen douchebag of the week goes to Linus Torvalds for having a shitfit and big giant freakout when a simple 30 second explanation would have solved the whole thing with ZERO drama involved.
And people wonder why Linux devs have this rep of being little elitist jerks? this is the kind of behavior I'd expect from Drepper, NOT Torvalds.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.