Slashdot Mirror
Linus Torvalds Explodes at Red Hat Developer
sfcrazy writes "Quite a lot of people raised their eyebrows the way ex-Red Hat developer Matthew Garrett made Microsoft the 'universal' control of any desktops PCs running with UEFI secure boot. Though the intentions of Garrett were clear — to enable GNU/Linux to be able to run Linux on Windows 8 certified PCs with secure boot; it was clearly putting Microsoft in a very powerful position. Linus, while a supporter of secure boot, exploded at Garrett and Howells when they proposed its inclusion in the kernel. Linus responded: 'Guys, this is not a d*#@-sucking contest. If you want to parse PE binaries, go right ahead. If Red Hat wants to deep-throat Microsoft, that's *your* issue. That has nothing what-so-ever to do with the kernel I maintain. It's trivial for you guys to have a signing machine that parses the PE binary, verifies the signatures, and signs the resulting keys with your own key. You already wrote the code, for chissake, it's in that f*cking pull request.'"
Update: 02/25 17:24 GMT by U L : The headline/article are misleading, since mjg seems to agree that the patch is a bit complicated : "(I mean, *I'm* fine with the idea that they're *@#$ing idiots and deserve to be miserable, but apparently there's people who think this is a vital part of a business model)". The issue at hand is a set of patches to load and store keys inside of a UEFI PE binary which is then passed to the kernel, which then extracts the keys from the binary. It's absurd, it's messy, and it's only needed because Microsoft will only sign PE binaries so not supporting it makes restricted boot even more difficult to support.
Well.. we have found Steve Ballmer's account name on Slashdot apparently...
He claims to love Linux, but what he really loves is himself.
Kinda puts that whole 'dick-sucking contest' comment in a whole new light, doesn't it?
I'd love to see the two having an argument.
me to better understand the issue here?
Well, as soon as they can get over this ideological bullshit and act like professionals, then, maybe, the year of linux on the desktop might magically materialize.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
Given that Linux is running on everything from my phone to my sat-nav to (some of) my clients to (some of) my servers and just about every oddball bit of embedded hardware in my entire workplace, I don't think Linux is suffering much.
And what he's basically doing is telling MS, and MS sycophants, that he doesn't want an OS where MS has to "sign off" on any changes in the bootloaders, etc. to make sure they are "secure". It's like being told that all pensions in the world now have to be signed off by Robert Maxwell, who can revoke your ability to use yours (even if you're nothing to do with him) on a whim.
The day MS lets in a bit of code into their OS that lets Linus turn off any and all Windows machines he wants - whether on a whim or for a good reason - and that they have to run past him every time they want a change made, that's the day I'll let someone put MS-signed junk into a Linux kernel that I use.
The "fix" seems to have included parsing PE binaries inside the linux kernel. That deserves getting shouted at. What you don't understand is that Linus doesn't care if more people adopt linux if it requires making the architecture smell bad.
Remember when he criticized GNOME? That was about as professional as a judge recommending a lawyer. What about when he called the OpenBSD team a bunch of masturbating monkeys? Linus is an a-hole. This isn't news.
I dunno... If you read the entire conversation in context it's not that bad and seems more like a slight fist shaking rather than explosion.
If Linus wasn't the person he was with the ideals he have Linux would have been as relevant as Minix or Haiku today.
Yes, he acts like an ass sometimes, usually when someone makes a choice that isn't viable in the long term.
Here in real life, you don't last long on the job if you treat your colleagues like that.
Steve Jobs disagrees with you. Or he would, if he were still alive.
I like this Spirit. The spirit of excellence
I'd be interested to know how you can separate words like "free" and "open" (as in "free" and "open source" software) from ideology.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Someone needs to tell him that it's hard enough to get people to adopt your OS with 3 million competing distros, much less with the leadership of an egotistical ass who takes every opportunity to scream like bipolar child at anyone who tries to actually help.
Linux is a kernel. Not an OS.
The only thing Garrett was doing in this case was recognizing a problem going forward, and fixing it.
Attempting to make the Linux kernel dependent on Microsoft is exacerbating a problem.
This is also not the first time Linus has had a publicized explosion at someone, and it probably won't be the last, either. This really is the sort of behavior that ultimately detracts from the open source community. Consider:
* Linus' track record of explosive, public comments against people whom he has some disagreement with
* Stallman's general Communist ramblings and presentation of himself as a disheveled bum
* type "Eric S Raymond" into Google, and the first suggestion is "Racist", not CatB, not How to be a Hacker, not any of his code.
Is Torvalds right? In this case, probably. There isn't a reason to include this functionality in the base kernel. If it is useful to RedHat, then RedHat can include it in their distribution. But publicly attacking someone, especially someone working for a company which is largely responsible for making Linux "respectable" isn't doing himself, the project, or the community at large any good, any more than Ballmer throwing chairs and screaming "Developers" or the "Howard Dean Scream" helped Microsoft or Howard Dean.
So I wasn't clear... Linus is saying he is against merging the code into the kernel, right?
He claims to love Linux, but what he really loves is himself. And every time it looks like Linux might achieve even a modicum of success, his overinflated ego is always there to ruin it.
Someone needs to tell him that it's hard enough to get people to adopt your OS with 3 million competing distros, much less with the leadership of an egotistical ass who takes every opportunity to scream like bipolar child at anyone who tries to actually help. The only thing Garrett was doing in this case was recognizing a problem going forward, and fixing it. And Torvalds tears his head off for it. He thinks everything has to be a big heroic stand--with him as hero, of course.
Well, if you read the mail conversation you'll know the majority of developers came out in agreeance with Linus and his views.on the matter. He has said he's tried being nicer, it just isn't him though. He is usual right though and when wrong accepts it. He is an extremely good maintainer regardless of peoples opinions on him.
glad Linus knows better than to let microsoft skullfuck him,
:)
"attaboy" Linus! Kudos
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
And Torvalds tears his head off for it. He thinks everything has to be a big heroic stand--with him as hero, of course.
This is pretty much standard of anything, that anyone creates and believes they should have final say over anything they create whether or not it's 'open to the public' or not. Or for the new /. crowd, this is your artist thrown a drama queen fit.
Om, nomnomnom...
When Linus makes a comment on something, why does he always sound like an eight year old throwing a tantrum? Looks like it would get embarrassing after a while. Yeesh!
He claims to love Linux, but what he really loves is himself...
This is an absurd troll. Linux IS Linux and he's free to do whatever he wishes in that regard. But, anyone with any understanding of the issue at all would clearly see that Linus is right. Microsoft has successfully leveraged it's monopoly status in the PC industry by implementing secure boot where they and they alone hold the keys to even BOOT a PC.
Implementing wedges or incorporating Microsoft's binaries into your code to boot your distribution is your option. But, expecting Linus to accept it into the kernel, when he has repeatedly made it clear that he will not incorporate non-free binaries, let alone this Microsoft root kit is asinine and ludicrous.
There's no ego thing going on with Linus, but i have to say he's sometimes way too rude. I don't know how in the world can you conclude something like that from this, or frankly anything Linus has said? If Linus doesn't want something, that can be done otherwise, to be included in the kernel, how is that an ego issue?
Do you even know what they are talking about here?
burned out maybe?
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Modicum of success?
So owning the server, embedded and mobile market is not enough success?
Obvious troll is obvious.
The more I learn about the developers within the tight circle of the Linux kernel the more elite and prickish they sound. That doesn't mean they aren't talented and can do a good job it's just a different environment than one I'd ever want to work in. It's extremely hostile with many competitors (windows, apple) trying to get you to conform so they control you.
Linus is that grizzly old man in the log cabin who owns 20,000 acres of timber that the logging companies desperately want. Except he has a gun, and he never wears any pants.
deep throating huh? sounds like Linus is a fan of facial abuse :/
"Secure boot" is really spelled "d-i-c-k s-u-c-k-i-n-g c-o-n-t-e-s-t"?
Well, as soon as they can get over this ideological bullshit and act like professionals, then, maybe, the year of linux on the desktop might magically materialize.
I use Linux because I feel it is the best Free and Open environment. Note those ideological words? OK, sibling comment says that, but it doesn't say this: I feel it has become that because of the ideology, not in spite of it. I give a fuck if everyone else runs the same operating system I am. And in any case, Android is continuing to gain market share. I figure it's got the best chance right now to become Linux on the desktop, I'll just back it.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
... Fox News is going to want him.
I admire his command of English, given that it's his second language.
Sounds like that other person that is really annoying... Oh yea RMS... Annoying as hell, but free software would not be in such a good position where it is now if it was not form him.
While Linus outbursts could make few pople nervous, I really start to hate such comments which are really aimed to get some mod points without saying anything true. But of course, everyone loves look for blame, so it works.
"He claims to love Linux, but what he really loves is himself. And every time it looks like Linux might achieve even a modicum of success, his overinflated ego is always there to ruin it."
I really hope that he loves himself, because that would mean he is healthy thinking person. That's actually requirement to survive this harsh world. If you loath yourself, then I really pitty you.
About rest of this paragraph - his outburst ruins any success, really? Either you are not fully informed or ignorant. You know what GPL means? That means that Ubuntu and Fedora can do as they want, as they release patches in public. They are not obliged to have it in mainline kernel - and neither Linus is obliged to support them. He maybe splits hair at first, but then he justifies his POV quite clearly. It's technical decision.
"Someone needs to tell him that it's hard enough to get people to adopt your OS with 3 million competing distros, much less with the leadership of an egotistical ass who takes every opportunity to scream like bipolar child at anyone who tries to actually help."
Wow, do you read lkml every day? I have done in recent past and Linus uses harsh language only in rarest cases. Also he has always been openly honest about what he thinks. It helps, because it cuts confusion down to minimum. If he doesn't like something, he says it openly. Trust me, it works. It's one of reasons why he still call the shots.
Also please cut it those cries about "3 million competing distros". First, there are maximum 4 major distros, supported by majority of open source and commercial software. There are fully standartised two packaging formats. Last I checked Windows has hundreds of different installers and packaging formats.
People don't use Linux not because of these things. They don't use it because it's not available in OEM form and they are afraid to use something different than their friends do.
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
Dunno... Since when is deep throat. A bad thing?
It's I think Torvalds needs to lighten lighten up.
It's ALL good, Linux everywhere compatible with everyone and thing. Free.
Face-to-face meetings carry a lot of emotional communication - body language, facial expressions...
Email - not so much.
So a simple "No that is not the way we are doing things" means a lot less in an email, than it does in person with a grimace for an expression (or body language by simulated gagging/throwing up).
So Linus has to use more direct language.
And he did say why it was the wrong thing to do.
Garret may have recognized a problem, but he doesn't recognize a solution that is already provided - which looks like a "NIH" issue (not-invented-here). This has recently been a rather bad problem for RH employees - for other examples, just look at how gnome3 is dying. Very likely, if there had been someone like Linus in charge of that project, someone willing to clearly identify stupidity when it shows, maybe things would have gone much better.
Linux isn't; RedHat is. That's like praising Xerox for the success of Microsoft. Honestly, when was the last time you saw SuSe or Debian used in a professional environment? RedHat is the Linux big-hitter today, and Linus throws his weight around like he's wholly responsible for that.
This really is the sort of behavior that ultimately detracts from the open source community.
Not calling things what they are is the kind of behavior that leads to oppression and fascism.
But publicly attacking someone, especially someone working for a company which is largely responsible for making Linux "respectable"
If their vision of making Linux respectable is to fellate Microsoft, they deserve public flaming and shaming. Fuck that fucking fuck.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Well said Linus.. I think.. lol
Here in real life, you don't last long on the job if you treat your colleagues like that.
Steve Jobs disagrees with you. Or he would, if he were still alive.
Steve Balmer too
The high-level view is this: Microsoft wants to ensure that nobody can run unapproved software on their home computers. As a first step toward this nightmare, they bullied computer makers into shipping a bootloader signature system that could potentially prevent people from running GNU/Linux. Red Hat, a multibillion dollar GNU/Linux distributor, decided to play along and got a special signing key from Microsoft. Linus apparently does not want to play along (and I commend him for it).
Palm trees and 8
Yeah because RH could always dump the Linux kernel and go for Hurd in a heartbeat right? Hardly.
I feel for Tovalds because he made statements about how SecureBoot would pose a "limited" security advantage 6 months ago and "kind of" supported it. Now it just seems that MS is trying to take too much control. So what's next RH will go down Novel's and Nikon's route and start shilling out royalties to MS to use Linux? just give MS an excuse or better yet bend to their will and they will only tighten their grip (lets not forget MS's recent investment in Dell ...)
As much as I do like some of MS products, I hate their business tactics and manoeuvring and maybe Tovalds' emotional "outburst" is because he's seeing what used to be a simple click install process for is his OS slowly become a more challenging process only for people who vet the types of hardware they use.
Add insult to injury he now he has one of his key suppliers bend to MS's will. I think it's well placed anger but just like most anger poorly placed in it's delivery.
And I speak for all of us when I say, I'm jealous of Linus's talent, success, and natural authority, but most of all, I hate his ability to cut through bullshit and put supercilious poseurs like me in their place.
I use Linux because I feel it is the best Free and Open environment.
Ideologies always have a few extremist supporters. And in this case most of them congregate around slashdot. Most people wouldn't choose an OS for an ideology though.
As Cardinal Richeleiu is reputed to have said:
Take it out of context and give it an inflamatory introduction and it looks like an explosion.
Read the exchange in the original context and it reads like just another frank exchange on the LKML.
You need to be the first post in this topic.
I see SuSe and debian used daily in professional environments.
RedHat is only big with a small group of Enterprises more interested in red tape and bureaucracy than getting work done. RedHat would have no product without Linus.
I have some friends that talk like that when they're completely calm. You can't gauge how emotional this response is based on the words alone.
(1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
Linus does not explode at "people whom he has some disagreement with". He does so at kernel developers, specifically, who are doing things that he sees as harmful to the Linux kernel.
Perhaps the desktop will be relevant again someday. By then Linux will be ready for it.
Well, as soon as they can get over this ideological bullshit and act like professionals, then, maybe, the year of linux on the desktop might magically materialize.
Zealotry will always slow the progress of any cause.
Linus's prima donna and disrespectful attitude is getting really old.
Posting anonymous just to be sure..
Since i saw a Google Tech Talk with Linus on stage, i certainly like him less.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8 (mostly about Git but nonetheless showcasing his persona)
Linux is great and all, but i am certainly not a fan of Linus anymore. Respect though for his incredible achievements.
He's a dick the same way Jobs was (also sharing similar strengths regarding vision), and i now realize he basically is a real life Sheldon Cooper, ego humor and everything.
This is also not the first time Linus has had a publicized explosion at someone, and it probably won't be the last, either.
How many public messages does he type in a year? And how many become well-publicized explosions? Maybe one every six to eight months? Doesn't sound so bad to me.
Irrelevant in the storage market, not owning the mobile market (and android is a lot more than "linux" anyhow), and not second to MS on the desktop. So uh... yeah, modicum of success fits pretty well?
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Aside from being a bit of a dick sometimes, I think I am totally in agreement with Linus on not wanting something like this in kernel space, let alone something from MS.
Perhaps a little more civility though, Linus ;)
The Linux kernel is not beholden to any business interest. Given the various user-space shenanigans (systemd, udev) over the past year, I'm not surprised by his response.
Trying to move user space items into the kernel that are not universally beneficial, or conversely trying to manipulate kernel space in ways that break long standing POSIX functionality - without a clear consensus from the community - is asking for it.
For all his faults, Linus has managed to keep the kernel relevant for a very large array of hardware in the face of these pressures.
Difference is, he's effective via persistence, Linus is effective via implementation.
Linus is either trolling or is seriously uninformed because UEFI isn't Microsoft's. They're just one name on a whole list of names attached to managing Intel's boot loader.
"The Unified EFI Forum or UEFI Forum (where UEFI stands for Unified Extensible Firmware Interface) is an alliance between several leading technology companies to modernize the booting process. The board of directors includes representatives from eleven "Promoter" companies: AMD, American Megatrends, Apple, Dell, HP, IBM, Insyde Software, Intel, Lenovo, Microsoft, and Phoenix Technologies."
That deserves getting shouted at? I think a simple civilized smackdown would have sufficed, but hey, this is Linus we are talking about.
This is also not the first time Linus has had a publicized explosion at someone, and it probably won't be the last, either.
Sorry, that's bullshit. Linus doesn't pull punches and he doesn't sugar-coat what he says, he doesn't change his statements to adhere to political correctness. If you can't handle that, then go find somewhere else to cry about it.
But publicly attacking someone, especially someone working for a company which is largely responsible for making Linux "respectable" isn't doing himself, the project, or the community at large any goo
Ya, actually it does do a lot of good. People who say and do idiotic things ought to be called out, publicly. This isn't fucking gradeschool, nobody has any duty to respect your delicate sensibilities. Grow a thicker skin or GTFO. And just so it doesn't cause you mental anguish when you figure it out, I'll go ahead and let you know you don't get a trophy for "participation" either.
Most people wouldn't choose an OS for an ideology though.
I wouldn't expect them to. I'd expect them to choose it based on the benefits of the ideology. Of course, that would only be if I didn't know that propaganda works.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Irrelevant in the storage market my ass.
They own mobile. Android now moves more units and every distro is a lot more than a kernel.
The desktop is a dying market.
It also owns embedded. It literally dominates more fields than any other competitor even plays in.
yep, pretty much. Everyone knows if he thinks your work is stupid he'll call you on it, properly, in front of everyone.
Wait, what? Every place I've worked in for years that has linux deployed, from aerospace to real estate, has had Debian deployed somewhere. As for RedHat, I see more CentOS stuff than pure RedHat offerings. Where are you talking about? Web hosting?
You, sir, are a liar. I've worked for half a dozen Fortune 500 companies, and I have only ever seen RedHat in production environments where Linux is used. The company I work for now is in the process of replacing a 200+ server environment, moving from HPUX/PA-RISC to RedHat/x86_64 because they want to get away from some of the red tape and bureaucracy.
Bottom line is that big, successful, organized companies need contracts, paper trails, and paid support -- something RedHat provides above and beyond any of the other distros. They know their customers and play to their needs; that is why they are successful and profitable where so many others are not.
And here's our problem - no operating system wants to give any other operating system a heads up on anything, ever. The software landscape tends to "fracture by default" and it's a pure ego problem. Denying functionality because it might help your competitor creates confusion and frustration for users. It's like the video player you need to play most of the videos, the IM you need to chat with the most people, or the other one you need to chat with the rest of the people. It's the reason we all have 10,000 passwords to remember now and all our HDDs are full of software we barely need or barely works.
Linus, you speak a lot of truth a lot of the time but you just made everyones job harder and made yourself look childish while doing it.
If you do not have a thick skin in this business you will get eaten up from the inside. I learned that the hard way. This is a business of egos, because this is first a business of Art and Art is ego. Yes, we wrap logic and algorithms around it, but the foundation is a creative process and that is tied to ego.
The question I have is what happens to Linux after Linus? If he is the Monarch, is there an heir or will Linux slowly begin to splinter without that strong Ego to guide its vision. Seems like the King does not want something added to "his" kernel, but had he disappeared just before his tirade, what would have happened?
maybe this goes into the deeper question of who (or what) defines the core of a Kernel. For Windows, iOS it seems to be decisions by committee and business need. For Linux? We say it is open source, but with His Holiness issuing colorful decrees, how open is it besides the obvious insurrection approach.
From what little I've garnered about the man, that was a fairly tame tirade, it does no impact on the progress of Linux and once I finally understood the issue I tended to agree with Linus's view, though with less passion.
Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
"Not calling things what they are is the kind of behavior that leads to oppression and fascism."
What the fuck are you talking about? Ok, then I guess instead we have a dick-tator who belittles and berates anyone he disagrees with rather than simply laying down a sound technical argument and moving on.
THANK YOU
He is speaking about secure boot, which means getting a key signed by MS.
There are a lot of companies in on making sure your lose your ability to have a computer do as you like and not as the MPAA wants.
shouldn't be "chrissake"?
Honestly, when was the last time you saw SuSe or Debian used in a professional environment?
Speaking from the small window of the world that I can see... tons. SuSE is the preferred distro for anything that VMWare puts out today since, you know, they own the distro. That means that all of the pre-built appliances for their management services and apps are built on SuSE. Beyond that it's the distribution that IBM uses on any strange architecture they decide to run linux on, for example Watson is SuSE running on Power. I figured it would have been AIX but I was wrong. Beyond that, I'm told that it's also the preferred internal architecture for SAP development and if they can suggest an OS to you for the app servers, that's what it is... although officially they are OS agnostic.
I don't think you get near any of those things without a pretty big checkbook, so I'll go ahead and call them professional.
----- - The beatings will continue until morale improves
I don't get it ... MSFT bought this place ? so much astroturfing, spin doctors, etc. Linus is right, i do not want any MSFT trojans inside linux and i also will not buy a piece of hardware that requires permission from some corporation for its use.
Linus is the man !
If you've seen CentOS deployed in large aerospace firms, you've probably seen my handiwork. For companies that don't really need support (i.e.: tech boots on the ground), I try to push the completely free option as much as possible. Trying to say that CentOS isn't RedHat, though, is disingenuous at best.
Yeah, when I first read the summary I was afraid he was another victim of spontaneous combustion.
SuSE's in use in my corporate environment.
That means that Ubuntu and Fedora can do as they want, as they release patches in public. They are not obliged to have it in mainline kernel - and neither Linus is obliged to support them. He maybe splits hair at first, but then he justifies his POV quite clearly. It's technical decision.
Just to be clear I agree with his decision, he didn't have to be an ass hat about it though. But saying anyone can go ahead maintain their own kernel baseline is a little silly, As soon as you stray from the baseline on something like the LINUX kernel you are loosing a lot of what you gained by using LINUX. Now you personally have to reintegrate/test every time a new kernel release is put out to the public and the cost of doing this is very high.
I can't find the article, but it seems to me that Linus was just in slashdot news not too long ago for ripping some other developer a new one. And looking back I find he's the subject of an article where he rips some politician a new one on a web page. Is this what Linus Torvalds is all about, screaming at people? I get the whole "you gotta have a thick skin" argument, sure, but is Linus the one making that argument a reality? How about some shit like some fucking P.R., or some fucking H.R. sensitivity, and some bullshit? What's his fucking huge dickheaded problem?
"Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
Given Linus' stance that Tivoisation is not a problem because as long as Linux gets used on hardware, that's all that counts, in what way does using MS's "largesse" to sign secure boot linux to get Linux used on hardware any different?
I don't remember anyone claiming that if Linus wants to Deep Throat Tivo, that's HIS issue...
Oh wow, the Fortune 500! That's what, 0.0001% of all the companies in the world? I'm sure that's totally representative of how things are done.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
No. iTRON owns embedded.
Why is it when Linus speaks, the geek community bends over and takes it up the ass to cover for him? "slight fist shaking"? Seriously?
This is as much fanboi-ism as any Apple or MS fan. This was over the top, and unprofessional. If you spoke to anyone like this in a corporate environment, HR would be handing you your hat. Why does the FOSS community keep giving him a free pass to act like an asshat?
Fortune 500 would be the small group of enterprises that value red tape over getting shit done.
Working for one you should know that.
Pancreatic cancer has a very poor survival rate. Sometimes surgical, radiation, and chemotherapy treatment can increase the chances of surviving an extra five years from 10% to 20%. Joining hands with familly and singing Kum-by-yah would do about as much good - or harm.
And diet has not been shown to have any specific impact on the treatment of the cancer. Regarding prevention, heredity and smoking are the biggest risk factors. Other typical risks such as obesity, poor diet, inactivity, etc., factor into it but they are not specific to pancreatic cancer.
In other words, you are rude, ignorant, and callous. Your friends and family must be so proud of you.
John
I dunno... If you read the entire conversation in context it's not that bad and seems more like a slight fist shaking rather than explosion.
He talks about "dick sucking", so of course it involves both a fist shaking and an explosion.
I see Debian used every day. A lot of people use Debian on the back end. It's light weight, and handles small amounts of RAM better and more efficiently than Redhat due to the lesser number of processes starting by default. Sure there are a lot of Redhat instances, and a lot of Centos instances as well, but the number of Debian servers I see on a regular basis is pretty staggering.
Watch for Penguins, they eat Apples and throw rocks at Windows.
We are in a world where Linux at least has some sort of clout. The right answer is to exercise that to push forward a better model and not kowtow to MS security model. Even if you think the goal of securely measured and protected boot is good, MS as the root of trust is bad idea. I'd go further and say the mechanism's inability to measure/protect custom configuration and script content make it nearly a moot point. It's difficult to imagine a system that would be able to cover custom config and script content that would not at the same time render the 'SecureBoot' concept completely and utterly redundant.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
You can get paid support from third parties from other distros. And a lot of companies do. Just because they're not looking for an RHCSA to hire doesn't mean that they don't use linux. And if you're pushing a Redhat cert, you're more likely to see Redhat shops.
Watch for Penguins, they eat Apples and throw rocks at Windows.
Is Torvalds right? In this case, probably. There isn't a reason to include this functionality in the base kernel. If it is useful to RedHat, then RedHat can include it in their distribution. But publicly attacking someone, especially someone working for a company which is largely responsible for making Linux "respectable" isn't doing himself, the project, or the community at large any good, any more than Ballmer throwing chairs and screaming "Developers" or the "Howard Dean Scream" helped Microsoft or Howard Dean.
So because Redhat have made Linux respectable for business use that this should add weight to their proposals and get them special treatment if they make a brain dead suggestion? Linus is very brunt and forthright in his dealings, it saves time, there's no doubting his position. Sadly I wish I worked with more people like this rather than ones that talk around ideas and suggestions instead of being decisive.
Self censorship is a huge problem throughout organisations with people not being sure enough of themselves to say what they mean or think instead they couch replies in vague terms so as not to offend and hope for some sort of consensus. This invariably leads to sub-optimal solutions but allows people to escape any resultant blame due to the shared nature of the final decision process. I'd rather stick my neck out and say things as I see them. If I'm wrong on something tell me why and I'll take it onboard, however we should get a good solution rather than a half-assed one.
The explosion serves two purposes; firstly it puts an immediate block on this particular action, secondly its memorable and noticeable enough so as to dissuade future proposals of a similar nature thus saving time.
You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
But sometimes being nice and making compromises doesn't work, in which case you actually need to be a dick about things in order to make sure shit gets done the right way. Somebody pussyfoots around, involves an unnecessary third party, or overly complicates things which can affect the reputation of your own work, then yeah - call them on their bullshit. An outburst like this might be a necessary evil when getting the point across, even if doesn't always look good when the public ends up seeing it.
Hence why I used the qualifier 'pure', and I meant relative to Red Hat's actual products, not in general.
Linus Torvalds has another childish temper tantrum. News at 11.
/* No Comment */
There's not a single exclamation mark in that response.
The guy swears, not news.
Perhaps next time submit a post about the subject matter being discussed and not how it's discussed?
So because you've never seen it, it can't happen? Nice God complex you've got there.
I'm currently working for a Fortune 100 company managing somewhere in the region of 5000 servers all running Ubuntu. My previous place was 400 machines all running Debian.
Thanks for the pointer to Eric S Raymond. I only knew of his from The Cathedral and the Bazaar. I had no idea he was a right wing nut, global warming and HIV denier, Bush jr supporter, islamophobic war-monger, homophobic, racist troll.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond
Him and Stallman, what a pair! By comparison Torvalds looks quite tame and reasonable.
Totally with Linus on this one. Guy is blunt, terse and sans bu!!sh!t. I like it.
And a diet of all sugar will fuck up your pancreas, and give you pancreatic cancer. Even if that sugar is fructose.
Just like a steady stream of steroids will give you ball cancer. Is Lance Armstrong your hero too?
Having cancer doesn't excuse being a shitty human being. Both Jobs and Armstrong are/were shitty human beings.
pics or it didn't happen
Don't hold back Linus. Tell us how you really feel!
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
My theory is that we all have a Stallman Point, a spot on the spectrum of the slide away from personal computing freedom where we just can't calmly stand around and watch folks push things further the wrong way. It looks to me like Linus just hit his with this "SecureBoot" crapola.
Sadly, everyone has a slightly different Stallman Point, and folks who haven't yet reached theirs look at someone getting upset and think "what an unreasonable person", while those who are long past theirs look at the same person and say "what a buffoon. If he'd only had this fit back at *my* Stallman Point we could have nipped this in the bud, but now its far too late".
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'd expect them to choose it based on the benefits of the ideology.
Where there are benefits, they do. Chiefly the benefit of being free as in beer. That's why it's been used for embedded devices such as routers and phones. But that's manufacturers making the choice.
On the desktop there's consumer choice. And for most consumers free as in beer is less useful to them than ease of use and compatibility.
On servers, free as in beer has turned out to be more important than ease of use, because computer operators can be expected to learn the accidental complexity.
Speaking from the small window of the world that I can see... tons. SuSE is the preferred distro for anything that VMWare puts out today since, you know, they own the distro. That means that all of the pre-built appliances for their management services and apps are built on SuSE. Beyond that it's the distribution that IBM uses on any strange architecture they decide to run linux on, for example Watson is SuSE running on Power. I figured it would have been AIX but I was wrong. Beyond that, I'm told that it's also the preferred internal architecture for SAP development and if they can suggest an OS to you for the app servers, that's what it is... although officially they are OS agnostic. I don't think you get near any of those things without a pretty big checkbook, so I'll go ahead and call them professional.
That is a bizarre world indeed. Since when does VMWare own SuSE? Last a heard they were bought from Novell by Attachmate, and I don't see where anything has changed there.
While others have already said 'this specific bit *IS* Microsoft's', I'll also say that UEFI is largely designed around MS conventions and requirements, just like BIOS specs were in the 1980s.
UEFI interfaces are defined in terms of Microsoft calling conventions and using a binary format defined by Microsoft. The behavior of the system clock is defined in terms of MS expectation of local timezone instead of GMT. All of these things are areas where MS has explicitly deviated from everyone else in the industry, and UEFI happens to follow MS on every last single deviation that presents itself.
At the core of UEFI, it's genesis was Intel trying to push an incompatible architecture (Itanium) and working closely with MS to assure there would be 'a' Windows running on it which was perceived to be the sole requirement to make the industry dump x86, even if it couldn't run x86 compiled applications. Thinks have evolved from there, but that relationship still defines most of what UEFI continues to be.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
I agree with him on this, the way he expressed it is unfortunate but his point stands.
Right... you conveniently did not read the rest and went straight to defamatory attacks.
I guess you missed the fact that this is not a dick-sucking contest.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
It's a damn shame most people who see your comment won't realize it is correct, and will continue to be oblivious of the existence of the most used OS on the planet.
most people don't choose OS, they just use whatever comes preinstalled.
What? He's totally right: Linus jerks himself in front a mirror, that's common knowledge.
Always loved Woody Allen's quote: "Don't knock masturbation. It's sex with someone you love."
the year of linux on the desktop might magically materialize
What's a "desktop" grandpa?
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I see Debian used in professional environments every day, and I do not see RedHat at near that frequency. From where I stand and from what I see Debian and Debian derivatives obliterate RedHat in professional environments.
I do suspect RedHat has a dominance in mid sized office environments though - as that seems to be what they tout. I do not operate in these environemnts so I can't validate that claim though.
You forgot Bruce Perens. He's the reasonable one of that trio.
Not that ESR and Stallman don't have fair reasons for being unreasonable. So to speak.
On the desktop there's consumer choice. And for most consumers free as in beer is less useful to them than ease of use and compatibility.
No one has ever proven or even credibly suggested that Windows or OSX is easier to use than Linux, especially Android. And there's compatibility and then there's compatibility. You can be compatible with Windows applications and this year's hardware, or you can be compatible with literally everything else. Linux supports vastly more hardware than does any Windows version. My house is peppered with hardware I bought used because Windows no longer offered drivers, nor the manufacturer. Scanners, printers, all manner of peripheral. People sell stuff because it doesn't work with their new Windows PC, and then I buy it and plug it into Linux and it works great.
On servers, free as in beer has turned out to be more important than ease of use, because computer operators can be expected to learn the accidental complexity.
If you can seriously sit there and tell me that Windows makes servers easier to use in the way that admins use servers, you know fuck-all about anything.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Because in this case he's fighting for their interests. If he allowed the patch it would give Microsoft very real control over what you can and can not run Linux on - and worse than that it would give them the power to revoke that permission from every kernel having that patch.
This is meant to be anything but a way to stop malware, this is meant to stop Microsoft software piracy and hurt alternative OSes in the process.
This really is the sort of behavior that ultimately detracts from the open source community.
Not calling things what they are is the kind of behavior that leads to oppression and fascism.
Being not an asshole = oppression and fascism. I don't even...
That's it. I'm starting to format my USB pens as UDF.
Show me an actual shipping storage array that is linux at it's core.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Saying that giving house keys over to Microsoft is "fixing the problem" means said person must be a Microsoft person.
"The enemy" is your choice of words, not mine.
Not all professional environment are in Fortune xxx companies.
Just because a company isn't big enough to qualify for the Fxxx list doesn't mean it's unprofessional - just smaller...
Would a company providing support for Debian to others be unprofessional because they don't use Red Hat internally?
You think it's OK to tell people to shut up by implying they are gay? Can I tell asian developers they have small penises and go "ching chong wing wong" when we have disagreements on the job? Can I call female coworkers they are dumb dyke bitches?
The law sure says I cant. You say that kind of shit on the job, HR will have you out the door before you know what's happening, you might even find yourself on the ass end of a lawsuit.
Fuck Linus for being a disrespectful childish 'brogrammer' who can't carry himself as a professional, and fuck Linus for carrying his childish homophobia into the modern age.
He's the one who needs the thicker skin, or to GTFO.
What? He's totally right: Linus jerks himself in front a mirror, that's common knowledge.
Since any mirror effectively splits the universe into two halves, one of them being in front of the mirror, it's highly likely that whenever you're jerking off, you're doing so in the front half-space of a significant number of mirrors.
Ezekiel 23:20
Canonical and Red Hat might be having a dick sucking contest. Maybe they just didn't invite Linus.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Here's a thought. If having Microsoft being in charge of providing the key as to who gets to boot or not is such a good idea, then it would make just as much sense to have Apple be in charge of the key or even Redhat. Would Microsoft be willing to put Redhat in control of key signing into their kernel? Probably not. Then why should the linux kernel be subjected to Microsoft's control?
Torvalds is correct on this. It is unfortunate in the way he articulated it, because instead of reasoned argument, it comes across as a flaming rant.
This isn't "ideological bs" any more. In order to BOOT AND RUN Linux on newer Hardware "sold for Windows 8" you must have a signed bios loader. Red Hat COULD have petitioned for their OWN code to be used, but instead "rent" a key from Microsoft.
Pnce the old stock flushes, We are just a few month away from EVERY MOTHERBOARD SOLD to require Microsoft's PERMISSION to boot another OS. Not just Dells or HPs pre-configured, but companies are now pushed to sell only "Windows Motherboards" whether you decide to buy Windows or not!
Even APPLE hardware isn't locked down THAT tightly. We've already had cases where the ol' "API works for Windows" bit not the signed Microsoft alternate-OS key... Out of Samsung notebooks.
We are back to 1999 and using obscure bugs in the "open" hardware to lock Alternate OSes out of the hardware market... For good. Hope you like Rasperry Pi because niche, custom hardware is the only stuff that will FREELY run Linux from this point on.
That man is my hero... I really wish more Engineers and Software guys would stand up to idiocy like that.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Uh, what? Suse is deployed in diverse corporate environments. The London Stock Exchange comes to mind.
If this is a stopgap measure to allow me to run Linux on secure boot systems, I'm okay with that until a different viable solution comes along.
Linus is okay with the stopgap measure. What he isn't okay with is including this hack of a hack AND a WIndows PE Binary Blob in the mainline kernel.
[Rent This Space]
UEFI and Secure Boot are the end of Linux as we know it. Linux will no longer be a free and open operating system, and will instead become a pet project of Microsoft.
That's just the way it is. It was a fun experiment, but it is over, and Linux lost. Now Linux will be able to be run only by the good graces of Microsoft, with a key signing fee, of course.
This would've been a more interesting article, if it discussed the merits or lack thereof, of the RedHat change in the Linux kernel.
The "drama" the article discusses is of no value to anyone, but the likes of Nerd TMZ (if there was such a thing).
Can we please stop posting articles such as these? And if someone does post one, can we NOT promote them onto the front page?
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
Linus is mad because Red Hat had the resources to build and certify THEIR OWN keys to Microsoft's "standard" but they choose to RENT A Key instead. Ted Hat was the only company big enough to negotiate or pay lawyers to FORCE the issue. And they rolled over.
Linus was actually just fine with all the other companies that "just barely" complied with the letter of the GPL... He has always been more pragmatic about USING Linux and not so much every little bit be "Free Software" ... Except now Microsoft just locked EVERYBODY OUT to charge RENT. Oops!
you wish you worked with people who suggested you like to suck dick when they disagreed with you?
It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
DROBO
I don't think the desktop is terribly important now that mobile and tablets have exploded. The desktop isn't growing anymore. The notebook is taking over that market and tablets and smartphones are expanding like crazy. The Linux kernel owns those markets. Why give a fuck about the desktop anymore?
Honestly, when was the last time you saw SuSe or Debian used in a professional environment?
Every single day, and that's in my point-of-sale work for one of the largest retailers in the United States.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
That video is one of the reasons I *like* Linus.
But I actually get things done for a living, so I understand where he's coming from.
the explosion also raises awareness of the problem of putting Linux at risk from microsoft signoff on any bootloader. Not sure if your comments and this awareness are what Linus is hoping to accomplish, but it is pretty effective.
Android likely has a bigger install base than any Linux distro out there. It's extremely successful. Also, Linus decides what goes into the kernel. The rest of the OS isn't under his control but he does get to ultimately decide what goes in the kernel.
OK! Who threw the first chair in this?
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
... and Hans Reiser murdered his wife, but that's quite orthogonal to the quality of his code, and by all accounts ReiserFS is an excellent piece of work.
I too abhor ESR's gun nut, extreme libertarian views. But The Cathedral And The Bazaar was an insightful piece that really did launch a valuable movement. Fetchmail isn't a major achievement, but it's stable and useful, and no doubt a better product for ESR's community-driving than it would have been if he'd coded it all alone.
And don't lump ESR and RMS together - RMS is driven by principle, ESR is driven by pragmatism. RMS believes it's better to use bad software than non-free software. ESR believes open source leads to processes that produce high quality software.
Linus, I think, is on the pragmatic side, and not married to the GPL. I don't think he put a great deal of thought into choosing the license for Linux -- he wanted to share it, he had no intention of it being more than a hobbyist thing, at first. By the time Linux proved to be a potential big deal, there were so many contributors, that getting permission from all of them to alter the license would be all-but-impossible. Note that Linus chose to adopt the proprietary BitKeeper SCM system, before he wrote Git; Git is GPL - so he must be happy with that license for his own work.
This entire secureboot setup gave all the power and leverage to microsoft. Its not even a matter of do you trust the company, its a public company that who knows might not be a round in a few years, do you really want to risk giving the key to update and unlock new computers to a company and hope it all works out for the best?
http://interserver.net/
That's not cussing, it's Perl. Relax guys.
Table-ized A.I.
is this how Linus always behaved?
Yes.
Microsoft has confused security with authority. Or perhaps they think they are synonyms.
Regardless I think Linus responded quite appropriately.
I was crazy back when being crazy really meant something. (Charles Manson)
Linus is fine, it's a cultural thing. He's serious and not serious at the same time in that talk, to make his point.
Single threaded minds usually can't cope with that and get hung up and offended on the "offensive" parts, usually the ones were Linus is of a different mind, (read, "thinks listeners favorite piece of software is shit") and have absolutely no intention of changing.
Just remember that there is no right to not be offended, even if you feel entitled to such a right.
Show me an actual shipping storage array that is linux at it's core.
All of Synology's stuff uses Busybox, which is generally backed by a Linux kernel. Their wiki article seems to back this idea. Small player, I know, but great hardware for the SMB that needs an iSCSI NAS for their first few pieces of VM infrastructure.
SuSE is outdated. It is called SUSE since several years.
If you want to be nostalgic, call it S.u.S.E.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SUSE
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
The difference between him and the others you mention, is that he is quite self effacing. He recognises the way he is, makes no apology for it, but is aware of the effect that it causes others and that it may not be the best way.
Well, unlike Jobs, Linus is creating/maintaining/guarding some of the most important code in the world... which is *free*. He can dick it up all he wants I say.
How does BSD get around the problem tha a UEFI motherboard is permenantly "rooted" unless you get a certified key from M$ ?
Certified key wont actually encrypt your system (at the RAM/CPU level) unless you load Microsoft's unlocking code BEFORE you start your Kernel so your kernel is signed to the system.
Herding lots of programmers must drive men to cursing, because Gates & Jobs could rant their curses with the best of them -- and it got them results. Human nature. No news here.
I would much rather have The Linux Foundation get itself on par with Microsoft in getting keys implemented by OEMs.
Giving MS a kill switch is just asking for trouble.
Linus fights for your freedom of vendor lock him, now if you personally want to "go along to get along" you can look the other way like a "good german" while they
MSsoft legally encloses the every aspect of the software industry!
He claims to love Linux, but what he really loves is himself.
Or maybe he's just passionate about maintaining the integrity of his creation.. We'll see how you do when you write an operating system that revolutionizes the computing world...
Really? IBM, HP, Dell, AT&T? None of them? Sure about that?
You wouldn't build a cluster (perhaps a "Cloud") of machines all using the same OS? Double sure about that?
Sure thing buddy. Perhaps you need to spend less time being wrong on the Internet and try reading some of it. Hell I've given you so much information about who I work for you'd have to be a chimp not to be able to work it out and verify it's all true in under a minute using Google.
As a former Microsoft employee I kind of agree with Linus. I know some of the goons responsible for the Win8 code signing and I know the way they think. Simply: they are morons, they are in way over their head, and they definitely should not be allowed to let taint the minds of kernel developers on other platforms. Linus is absolutely right to say that there should not be a PE image parser in the kernel just because Microsoft wants to mandate it.
Now, while you criticize Linus for this perfectly rational point, and say that he hasn't had mainstream success, I say that Linux is actually a smashing success. Maybe the workstation and PC thing didn't take off but you can't really talk about servers or smartphones or anything embedded without considering it.
Someone needs to be a dick to make Linux continue to be successful. How big a dick is questionable, but look at HURD and Plan10... It's a design by committee process without as strong a leader, neither has made any actual progress towards being usable, and both have been around for 2 decades.
Yes, so did I, a bit. But then I watched this one and all is good again... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MShbP3OpASA
There was speculation about VMware buying SuSE Linux back in Sept 2010, but I dont think it ever went through. The following article gives insight as to why a deal may have never been made http://blogs.computerworld.com/17019/vmwares_novell_suse_linux_buy_out_runs_into_a_snag
Even though a deal was likely never made, VMWare does use SLES as their go-to.
Almost every startup I have worked at in the last 10 years has used Centos for at least some of the systems.
Really? IBM, HP, Dell, AT&T? None of them? Sure about that?
Sure about what? That four constitutes a "precious few" out of one hundred? Yes, quite sure. I didn't say "none"; you said that.
That would be you twisting the facts again, by the way.
You wouldn't build a cluster (perhaps a "Cloud") of machines all using the same OS? Double sure about that?
Sure. Name one of those four that would do so using Ubuntu. IBM and HP both have their own solutions, and Dell is a RHEL reseller. That leaves you AT&T... would you like to call them or should I?
Most common mode I know is to buy one RHEL license for one server and run all other servers with CentOS. Most commercial (5 digit and more yearly license price, e.g. engineering software) linux applications are only certified for RHEL and sometimes SuSE EL and the vendors refuse support when you are running it on other distros. If you can reproduce the problem on RHEL it is a problem with the application, when not it is a problem with the distro.
Sorry, you're falling flat on your face for this one. Here's why:
When I ask the question, "How do change the screen resolution?"
Windows: Control Panel
Mac: System Preferences
Linux: It depends
"Where do I change my network settings?"
Windows: Control Panel
Mac: System Preferences
Linux: It depends
The reason Windows and Mac and Android are dominating user devices is because they have standardized a GUI environment, and GUI failure is considered operating system failure.
And that makes it ok to be a total tool? I'm not questioning his motives. It's his delivery. He's being an asshat, and everyone is looking the other way. There is no reason to act the way he does. Millions of businesses manage to operate smoothly without throwing around words like "fucking" and "Dick sucking contest".
Slashdot is an intelligent crowd, yet they can't seem to separate the message from the delivery.
And Linus would have no product without all of the developers efforts...including Red Hat. Yes, we can play this game of who needs whom, but when the chips are down, history will show that one person didn't do it all.
Uhoh, Torvalds acting like a spoiled child rather than a professional kernel developer again.
I don't care how right he is, or how it came to this. Torvalds needs to be better than this. I've already written him off as a petulant deity: he can't even go 60 days without acting totally inappropriately toward others in the community- The very same community that ensures his daily relevance!
Be a man, then make your point. That's all I ask from the chief architect of the Linux kernel.
Linux might achieve even a modicum of success
*lmao* Have you seen Linux deployments out there? Just about anything that doesn't run Apple or Windows *IS RUNNING LINUX*, including those little set top boxes, your phones, TVs, etc. There are literally billions of linux boxes out there.
modicum of success... bwahahaha
No, there are things you can be critical of Torvalds, but this is not one of them. There is no reason to taint the entire kernel. If Redhat wants to use it, redhat can keep (and had kept their own customized kernels previously) doing it themselves.
All the news lately surrounding Linus Torvalds makes him look like arrogant and hotheaded.
Even if dropping the bomb on somebody is justified I'd expect more professionalism from somebody of his stature rather then resorting to juvenile insults and grotesque metaphors.
Professionalism seems to be dying a slow death.
The embedded / real-time operating system market is very crowded with probably more than hundred competitors. I don't know any reliable study about market shares but some of the bigger players are Linux, VxWorks and QNX.
Btw: iTRON is an OS API standard like POSIX not an OS itself
That is a bizarre world indeed. Since when does VMWare own SuSE? Last a heard they were bought from Novell by Attachmate, and I don't see where anything has changed there.
VMWare was trying to buy Novell in 2010, but that ended up not happening when Microsoft stepped in and bought some unspecified IP from Novell for $450 million, bringing the price for the rest of the company down to something Attachmate could afford. I'm guessing phoebus missed that bit.
Either that, or they're mixing up EMC Corporation (parent of VMWare) with Elliot Management Corporation (part owner of the Attachmate Group.).
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Look, you're welcome to slink back to your apple cube and be morally bankrupt by yourself. You're not welcome to whine about it when others don't do the same.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
That's debatable. Free development grows in proportion to the size of the Internet connected population. RMS got in using fear tactics to change what license people use at a time when the Internet was small and few people cared about licensing; he's then getting credit for all the people using the fear-based license, even when they're just doing it because their neighbor does.
It is not at all clear what state we would have been in if we'd used a more free license rather than a fear based one. If the fear is reasonable, then we would be worse off. If the fear is unreasonable, then we would be better off, because we'd get the benefits of people having the freedom to do more thing.
I'm on the side of freedom, personally - I think the fear is overblown, and giving people more freedom (including the freedom to restrict) would have led to a better world, including more free software. But I don't know for sure.
Not to get too far off topic but Linux isn't used as often in embedded systems as most Slashdrones make it sound. Unless you've done some serious research into the matter it's likely that just about 70% of all embedded systems in your workplace run something that isn't Linux. That's about where the average stands.
Of course, you could also be neglecting to count all of your embedded systems since they don't come outright with the trappings you'd expect. In that case you're simply short sighted.
They don't own SUSE but they do distribute SUSE licenses and support with their products.
And in any case, Android is continuing to gain market share. I figure it's got the best chance right now to become Linux on the desktop, I'll just back it.
I hope not. The Linux part is great but 99% of the Android user experience is fucking Java which totally sucks. A slow iOS device is a million times smoother than a cranked to the max Android device precisely because of the crapfest that is Java.
Not to threadjack, but my sole reason for disliking debian in a prod environment is support - how do you guys get support from the vendor when shit breaks at 3am on a sunday morning? In our environment we use Scientific Linux or CentOS in development, and RHEL in prod (also working for a fortune 100 company). We can call or open a support ticket with RedHat and usually we have a response within an hour. Do you guys work with a 3rd party vendor? Do you get support from canonical?
Why does it mean getting a key signed by MS? Why does no one want to add their own freaking key to their own system? I really don't understand this.
What? He's totally right: Linus jerks himself in front a mirror, that's common knowledge.
Doesn't everyone?
Be seeing you...
Might want to have a look at that PVS code. Major overdraw issues. I think there's a paper by Borges that might help.
Name one? How about all four:
HP
IBM
Dell
AT&T (although AT&T don't mention it themselves, but their cloud does run on Ubuntu: "Ubuntu and OpenStack are also powering clouds at the likes of HP, AT&T, Rackspace and Dell.")
You either support it yourself or run Ubuntu with support provided by Canonical.
That was always the Suse thing though - they wanted to be a direct competitor with Red Hat by offering support along with their own kool-aid soaked Linux (not implying it is a bad thing, they did some really COOL things like offering free linux training to my high school though I bet after the Novell purchase that stopped). That's the really big deal here - support. (Insert your favorite open source OS here) is great until something breaks in the middle of the night and the poor sod who is on call has no one to contact for tech support. Red Hat and Suse both offer this which is why we like them for production environments.
and the instant that happens another anti-trust suit occurs mandating hardware be open.
oh doom and gloomer, how do you make it out of bed in the morning?
its not microsofts permission. its taking hardware that was designed group up to be used for Windows 8 and making it do something outside what it was designed to do. dont want to get a MS key? dont buy hardware designed from the ground up for one OS and one OS only.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Why use Linux when you don't uphold the PRINICPLES of using Linux? FUck off you M$ $HILL BOY.;
You called me a liar. As in, "You can't possibly be telling the truth about using Ubuntu on 5000 machines." Stop back peddling. You're wrong, and you called me a liar about it.
You're the one backpedaling. You quoted me, out of context, and replied to that very specific snippet, then bitch when I correct that. Cry me a fucking river.
I called you a liar regarding your assertion that you work for a company that runs a 5000 server farm consisting of 100% Ubuntu instances, which has since been amended to imply that it's all part of one cluster, making the claim even more unbelievable. So, yeah, I stand by my claim that you're a liar, more so now that before because of your constantly-shifting goalposts, such as suggesting that Dell and HP can deliver Ubuntu-based solutions somehow proves your claim.
You're a liar and a fool... and I'm done wasting my time with you.
My kingdom for some mod points...
A lot of places will do CentOS in dev environments, and for prod environments will use RHEL because of the support that is offered. When something is down and you are under pressures of regulatory compliance, customer experience, or mission critical systems you need a vendor you can reach out and talk to. A forum or mailing list don't count because if you have a very esoteric problem you'll more than likely never hear a response. Directors at our company don't want to have to sit in front of a congressional hearing and say, "Well, we thought we'd just support it ourselves, and no one answered my question on serverfault..."
This should be labeled 'Insightful'.
I call it 'The Aristocrats'
I am 110% in agreement with Linus about this, and if I were in his shoes, yelling loudly would be the least of my offenses... There would be a couple of new corpses in the swamp I suspect. UEFI secure boot has its place, but it MUST be at the option of the user to enable/disable it at will, otherwise, we are only RENTING our computers!
Athletic department on line 2. Coach says to put those goalposts right back where you found them, or he's going to come up here and kick some ass.
Sorry, you're falling flat on your face for this one. Here's why:
When I ask the question, "How do change the screen resolution?"
Windows: Control Panel
Mac: System Preferences
Linux: It depends
Statistically nobody asks "how do I change the screen resolution on Linux". They ask "How do I change the screen resolution on Ubuntu", or "...redhat". (Most users of other Linuxes can figure this shit out for themselves.) You are reframing the question in a disingenuous manner. You may try again, but don't apologize to me unless you're going to apologize for your nonsense.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Over 5000 now, with 100% Ubuntu baring twenty or so running FreeBSD or RedHat, and 100 or so Windows machines.
Oh boy are you an idiot.
It does prove my claim, because I work for one of those four companies that run Ubuntu based clouds, as part of the team that manage on of those Ubuntu based clouds.
You're very angry at being proved wrong. What was it, cry me a fucking river? Oh wait, you already have. Here, have a tissue.
UEFI interfaces are defined in terms of Microsoft calling conventions and using a binary format defined by Microsoft. The behavior of the system clock is defined in terms of MS expectation of local timezone instead of GMT. All of these things are areas where MS has explicitly deviated from everyone else in the industry
Microsoft's binary format is PE, which is basically COFF - Common Object File Format. It is UNIX that moved from COFF to ELF. The time-zone behaviour dates from the release of DOS in 1981. What industry standard were Microsoft ignoring then? On the PC platform it is the various UNIX-alikes that diverged from the existing standard set by IBM and Microsoft.
Another fun fact: the use of CR/LF for line endings pre-dates any version of UNIX and is still used in a great many internet protocols.
I'm glad you have 5 or 10 years for an anti-trust suit to wind it's way through the courts to fix something that should never have been broken dude, but most of us just want to get our work done and move on.
I'm not convinced. I haven't heard Guido (Python) acting like that. Still, I've heard worse about Theo (one of the BSDs). So it's one way to herd cats.
I think the thing is that there are different effective management styles...but not an unlimited number of them. And Linus is manifesting ONE of them. Also that if you have an effective management style, the most likely effect of trying to change it is that you'll switch to an ineffective one.
That said, it's also true that we don't hear about the normal flow of things, unless we follow the developers list, so we only hear about the things that are "newsworthy". This is a strongly selective filter that tends to present people in their worst light.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
That's why his name should be pronounced "Eric Ass Raymond". He is a dick of unimaginable proportions, and a fat neckbeard to boot.
Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
Even if there is another anti-trust suit... it'll take about 7 years before it finally gets resolved, and in the meantime the lockdown is already in force. And the hardware wasn't designed from the ground-up to only run one OS. It was designed to run a whole bunch of different things, then right at the end they actually add an additional lock to prevent other OSes from running.
Well, as soon as they can get over this ideological bullshit and act like professionals, then, maybe, the year of linux on the desktop might magically materialize.
Yeah, adding bloated support for shitty Microsoft features that noone cares about is suddenly going to make LInux boom on desktop.
Silly.
His personality has changed. He has become far more grumpy in his older age.
But that is often the price you pay when a group of people in essence elect you as a super star.
Sure many people find the new more aggressive Linus favorable, however it is akin to the republican party going, the reason why we lost the election was we just wasn't conservative enough.
The aggressive personality will often get a strong following, however at a point you need to dial it down to get in the rest who need it. Being crude will not help you in the long run.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Why do you people put up with shit from this guy when you're still beating a dead jOBS?
This place is more and more serving the same purpose of edifying your worldview as Faux News . . .
VMWare is standardized on Suse and SLES now comes with all vSphere subs and there was rumor VMWare was going to buy SUSE before Attachmate did
VMWare owns SuSE? Novell owns them... unless somehow there's a weird corporate-overlord thing going on which includes both companies.
What? He's totally right: Linus jerks himself in front a mirror, that's common knowledge.
He's married to a karate world champion. It's a lot safer.
Who should be holding the keys to their computer -- the user of the computer of course! But Microsoft doesn't think that way, they think that they should "own" the PC, and the user just uses it. Might as well be a corporate mainframe with millions of dumb terminals in that case, and that's what we are moving towards.
Look at the XBOX -- the new one -- It will have to be connected all the time to the internet, to "verify" every game you try to play. So, how long until your PC has to be connected to internet to "verify" your BIOS before it will even boot into an OS?
And Microsoft holding the keys? What happens if, 6 weeks after we've had this forced on us, MS goes out of business? Or is "bought" in some hostile takeover and then the one server verifying all those keys is removed from service (anyone remember MLB or Danger/Sidekick?)
We will all have to throw away our machines. And we can't even back them up to recover the data (forget about moving the HD to a new machine with no key'ed BIOS, MS has already seen to that with new DRMs in Win8).
If we hand MS the keys, MS could destroy the entire PC industry with one mistake. Which would destroy the economy. All those machines all over the world that hold so much data that runs our planet, pfft. And those servers won't be running Linux after all, because MS prevented that from loading years before this tragedy took place.
And the mistake wouldn't even have to be MS's fault. I mean, how hard would it be for the Chinese to hack their way into the keys and disable the whole thing?
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
In order to love others, one must first love himself.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
This doesn't stop him from using computers the way he wants either.
Only those things that require a complete signed situation would. And if you load an unsigned binary into your Tivo? It doesn't work either.
These two things are ENTIRELY IDENTICAL.
Except one is a company called Tivo, the other is a company called Microsoft.
Honestly, when dealing with someone who is managing a large project, it is way better to have someone appear rude but be very frank and transparent on where they stand. It's way, WAY more difficult dealing with folks from either families or heritages which keep them silent about things they don't like until you suddenly have to redo half of a project because they didn't speak out, or chastize someone in a way that was necessary to keep the problem from festering.
Ok, my bad, I'll eat that crow. Last I heard they were buying them and I never did read the other side where it didn't happen, but I didn't go trolling (as in fishing, not green guy under the bridge) the net for the news.
That being said VMWare does still standardize on them and have been converting their old pre-built CentOS based appliances to SuSE. They also will give you a license for unlimited guests of SuSE-for-VM with the level of vSphere we buy here. Novell's website also references the SuSE-for-VM stuff a lot. It just felt like they owned them to me as a user :-P
----- - The beatings will continue until morale improves
You know, I had to google this because I'd never heard of it. Holy cow, I had no idea!
So XP was the last version of Windows that you have ever used?The control panel is not what it used to be since Vista...
On the next episode of Hoarding: Buried Alive....
If thou see a fair woman pay court to her, for thus thou wilt obtain love
I don't get why people think Steve Jobs was so great. It's not like he came up with the cure for cancer or something.
It's not an implication they are gay. It's an implication that they are interesting in serving Microsoft in ways that do not serve the Linux kernel.
It's a metaphor.
Fortune 500 would be the small group of enterprises that value red tape over getting shit done.
while making more money as a group than the rest of the world combined
FTFY
So... no support, then?
Can't we just disable UEFI and patch any signature/integrity checks for hardware without legacy support? Why should we care if they add unwanted features if we hack around it anyway?
There's a difference between saying "No, your idea is bad and we're not going to use it." and "You stupid cunt faggot fuckhead asssucking peniswrinkle fuckwit douchedrinking cockswallowing fudgepacking saladtossing whore!" And it's not on the part of the person making the bad suggestion. It's entirely upon the immature and childish speaker.
Any one who thinks being a manager/supervisor/directory means you have to be abusive is only proving that they are unsuited for the job they have.
BIOS was IBM not Microsoft and UEFI is also run on Mac's no? (then again Apple is/was owned partly by MSFT)
Watch out there. You're drawing an incorrect analogy between Linux and Windows/Mac. Linux is a kernel, not an operating system.
If you asked where to change screen resolution or network settings on Gentoo, Ubuntu, Fedora, or Arch, they all have a single answer. While these answers may not agree with each other, they may be changed by the user if they find that a certain management application offers more comprehensive controls over their settings, or if they are more used to one over the other.
You cannot compare Linux as an operating system.
That's great, Linus, very professional. I'm sorry I cannot converse with my coworkers the way you do, because I actually have to answer to someone. Some of us out here, Linus, practice something called, "getting along." It's possible to deal with someone's request which you do not like, from a person you might not like, without charging them with being Microsoft dick suckers. Believe me, it really is possible. I've disagreed with people myself over different issues at work without calling them Microsoft dick suckers. You might say something like, "I'm sorry, I don't want to do that for the reason's I will list here." Or, even, "I'm strongly opposed (While thinking, "you fucking MICROSOFT DICK SUCKER!") to doing this," all without publicly slamming them. One thing all this declaration of dick suckers does for me, it makes Open Source software that much more desirable. I mean, how can it be hard to deal with, or bad software, when people are yelling at each other and calling people "DICK SUCKERS" in public?
Linus performed coitus.
Not only that, Statistically, nobody asks "how do I change the screen resolution" at all. Linux, Windows and OSX all automatically probe the monitor for it's native resolution and set it without user intervention.
If you are going to talk about odd man out, Windows 8 is easily the worst offender.
Speaking from the small window of the world that I can see... tons. SuSE is the preferred distro for anything that VMWare puts out today since, you know, they own the distro.
Whoa! Thanks for the info!
--
SUSE employee
You're proving his point: statistically no one uses Linux on the desktop.
-- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
In the world of mature adults, documentation and backwards compatibility are the most essential parts to platform success. As a software vendor, if I have the choice of including Linux and having to write documentation and deal with bugs for dozens of distros or ignore the platform entirely, which business case do you think wins out? Keep in mind that end-user desktop Linux usage is the equivalent of a statistical error. Also keep in mind that I'm not talking about end user training alone. I'm talking about training the support staff that deals with end user support, automating testing suites for usability and bug tracking, unit testing, how to pass software updates, how to maintain backwards compatibility between distro upgrades... the Linux desktop ecosystem is a sea of poorly documented unknowns. That's just the reality.
At this point there isn't even a sane way to come up with use cases for desktops that will work between Ubuntu 12.04 and 11.04, or between Xubuntu and Kubuntu and Lubuntu. What happens when you make the move from Debian to Centos to Slackware to Arch to Mint to SuSE?
The excuses ideological die hards make are pathetic, and they have been for the fifteen years I have been a Linux user and hearing about the age of the Linux Desktop. Despite all the noise, the situation remains exactly the same: come up with a standardized interface for the Linux Desktop -- including all the software tools to test, update, and maintain software across the vast majority of Linux platforms -- or continue to lose. Those are the two choices.
If you want that success for the Linux desktop, you need to push for standards and quit making excuses.
Extremism in the defense of freedom is no vice.
-- Barry Goldwater
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Let's add to that list:
Around 80% of Linux on IBM Mainframes is SUSE.
Teradata underneath is 100% SLES
About half of all http://top500.org supercomputers run SLES, including Titan, the fastest.
Cray and SGI, not exactly small gear is pretty exclusively SLES.
No one has ever proven or even credibly suggested that Windows or OSX is easier to use than Linux
I love Linux. I'm typing this on Linux. I make my living writing services that run on Linux. That said, holy hells, I miss the OS X desktop whenever I'm on a Linux desktop. It's not so much that OS X is easier to use (although it is) as that all progress on Linux desktops seems to have stalled. KDE is powerful and pretty but there are a million knobs I have to dick around with to get it to work like I want it to. Gnome has gone off the deep end into stark insanity and is a throwaway now, as far as I'm concerned. I'm most comfortable these days with Mint's Cinnamon desktop (great job! seriously!), but it still feels clunky and hard to configure in comparison to OS X.
My ideal development environment would be the OS X interface on top of a Linux system. Since I can't have that, I use Linux for development and OS X at home when I just want to use my laptop without screwing around with settings ad infinitum.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
I think a lot of folks here are missing the point. The trouble is that the kernel running in secure boot mode has to be able to receive signed keys in a secure way (if you think secure boot is worth anything, many do not).
Linux running in secure boot mode is a done deal. The question is how do you import keys that are signed by Microsoft. In an ideal world you'd just upload the signed X.509 cert and you'd be done. Unfortunately, Microsoft will only sign PE binaries.
So the developers opted to enclose the X.509 cert in a PE binary. Unfortunately, that means the kernel needs to be able to read the PE binary and verify the signature all in kernel space, then extract the x,509 cert. This is undeniably messy.
Now lots of folks will argue that there's no point to this and it should be done in user space. I'm not going ti argue with that, but the reality is that most of the mechanics of this are already implemented, just not the PE stuff. You can sign kernel modules and verify them in kernel space with x.509 certs (at least by my reading of the thread).
Frankly, I think this is pretty much the only thing to do short of talking MS into signing x509 certs. The other suggested work-arounds involve additional authorities or doing stuff in user space. They are all workable, but are pretty clumsy compared to what's being proposed.
I think it may have been a mistake to just drop this ugly change on Linus without his involvement. My guess is that if the problem had been stated before coming up with a proposed implementaon, they might have come up with essentially the same solution with less drama.
Some of us carry a deep seated disdain for people beating around the bush with HR-approved corporate speak. Those of us that do would much rather deal with someone straightforward about their position.
Not to threadjack, but my sole reason for disliking debian in a prod environment is support - how do you guys get support from the vendor when shit breaks at 3am on a sunday morning?
That's kind of hypothetical, because I've never seen Debian break in a production environment, ever. There's a reason it's much beloved by sysadmins.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
It is because Linus is a dictator. Just as Gates & Jobs were and Ballmer & Cook are now. The thing about dictators is that they are not all bad. Dictators have greater power for good or ill and since most people are greedy and self serving, most dictators use their greater power for ill. Linus has been a benevolent dictator. He has used his power for good. He frequently does it in a crass way, but the end result is that his goal is generally not to throw us all under the bus for his own profit or convenience.
Secure boot can be disabled. Nobody is taking your ability to install another OS away. There is no need to worry.
It might be that you've had a little too much mercury in your hat brims Mr. Hatter.
Oh god that is the funniest thing I have read for ages. Thank you. :-)
You're not rude, but you are ignorant. The variant of pancreatic cancer that Jobs had was much more survivable than the majority case, and his nine-month fruit juice odyssey contributed directly to an early death; had he immediately followed the proper medical advice for treatment, he'd almost certainly still be alive today.
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
> as soon as they can get over this ideological bullshit and act like professionals
Linus is not stupid. He is a very smart man and probably thinks a lot of what he writes to the Internet.
Gentlemen, this is the War Room. You do not fight in the War Room.
I find it ironic that Apple with its UNIX derived OS adopted UEFI wholesale before Microsoft's platform widely did (EFI didn't become mainstream on PC motherboards until the past 2 years or so).
One thing that Red Hat would have done well to do would be to do a corporate FBSD, add their enhancements to it, and then offer it. Neither CentOS nor Oracle would have been able to loot them.
Add "hurd" to the list too...
God bless Linus.
Linus has standards that he will not compromise.
He sees this issue clearly and will not compromise.
Hopefully, he will not compromise in the future on this type of issue.
If he wants to cuss at any and all, so be it--my family does worse and I refuse to be a prude about it.
Would that all of us wore our big boy and big girls pants as well as he does.
PS. Posting as AC because I don't care.
Management by perkele http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Management_by_perkele
Why would you want OSX's UI over a Linux kernel?
There isn't anything technically in the Linux kernel that makes ti superior in some major compelling way that I'm aware of, why do you want the Linux kernel so much?
I ask out of ignorance, It would seem to me that you would actually be downgrading a bit, all things considered.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Sheldon Cooper is based on Lubos Motl.
Wow, there isn't a single fact in your post anywhere.
So in a few months ... Microsoft is going to change the requirements for the OS it just released, so all those people who got their hardware certified ... which REQUIRED THEM TO ALLOW BOOT OF OTHER OSes OR DISABLE SECURE BOOT OR ENTER YOUR OWN KEYS ... are not longer going to be certified?
Microsoft is going to openly say every machine sold with Windows 8 previous to now ... even ones previously certified ... are not certifed for Windows 8 any more?
By 99, Microsoft was well past obscure undocumented quirks to lockout apps (heh, if you use undocumented quirks of linux, you'll get flamed to all hell and back when it breaks and told its your fault. Ironic) and on to figuring out how to beat down Netscape.
FYI: The raspberry pi will not boot Linux without a special boot loader created under an NDA by Broadcom. Guess what, its in almost THE EXACT SAME SITUATION.
Congratulations, you've demonstrated you know none of the facts related to anything you spoke of.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
My lawn. Get off it, whippersnapper, will you?
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
The desktop wasn't really 'growing' before the tablet. Every business can not grow forever. At some point, the market gets saturated, that happened before the tablet crazy. Unless there has been a proportionally large decrease in sales, but thats not what happened. Sales in fact only went down ever so slightly. Less than 5%, and thats hard to determine if its actual tablet use thats causing hte problem, or still just saturation effects. Its likely tablets of course, as saturation really started all the way back in 2003 or so.
So in 2012, more tablets were sold than PCs ... about 5% more (roughly 95 million PCs versus 100 million tablets) ... and PCs only saw a 5% drop.
That says people aren't replacing their PCs with tablets, they are complementing their PCs with tablets.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
In fairness to your point, it's not just the Linux kernel. Linux distro package management is light years ahead of what Windows and even OS X have (yes: I use, love, and contribute to homebrew). Also, I develop software that runs on Linux servers and some of it is barely above kernel level. Running Linux means that I can test a lot of my work more quickly than if I had to deploy it to a development server after every save. But more than that, I genuinely love Linux. It's been good to me and I enjoy using it.
Still, I strongly prefer the OS X desktop. It's not from lack of trying the various FOSS offerings. I started off on Windowmaker and Enlightenment, then worked my way through the various Gnome epochs, KDE 2/3/4, a few tiling WMs (I wrote the semi-official Qtile-on-Ubuntu guide a couple of years ago), LXDE, and several others I'm sure I've forgotten along the way. OS X seems to be what Gnome tried and failed to achieve: a nice-looking, comfortable desktop without a million config knobs that most people can use out of the box. As much as I like Linux-the-OS, I like using OS-X-the-Desktop.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Well, unlike Jobs, Linus is creating/maintaining/guarding some of the most important code in the world... which is *free*. He can dick it up all he wants I say.
He doesn't create shit without a job and funding; and like Jobs business leaders with vision make it possible.
If you want that success for the Linux desktop, you need to push for standards and quit making excuses.
I thought I made myself clear, Android is the current great hope so I'll back Android. It's also easy as hell for the user to apprehend, and it does all the stuff the average user wants to do, and the above-average user or whatever he thinks he is can usually find ways to do the other stuff.
Now, if only android-x86 were usable.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
How often do you hear what Linus has to say to anyone? Most of what he says is boring and polite enough to not make the news. You can make anyone look like an arse if you cherry-pick the quotes. (Since the quotes have been selected for you, I'm not going to accuse you of trying to paint Linus in a bad light, but I hope you will keep my point in mind when reading gossip about celebrities.)
How is the kernel dependent on Microsoft because of this change?
Thats a fucking stupid statement to make and its just a flat out lie.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Linux isn't an operating system, though Android is an operating system built on Linux.
Asking how to change the network settings on "Linux" is like asking how to change the network settings on Mach. The overloading of the word "Linux" is the real problem here.
No one has ever proven or even credibly suggested that Windows or OSX is easier to use than Linux, especially Android.
Every single day they do. Including the other person answering your post. And he's a Linux user.
If you can seriously sit there and tell me that Windows makes servers easier to use in the way that admins use servers, you know fuck-all about anything.
There are plenty of admins (possibly most) that think Windows server is easier to use than Linux. There are probably more servers out there running Linux, because of the massive data centres that choose Linux because of the free-as-in-beer advantage. But admins? There's probably more Windows admins.
Just because I have a different perspective, and or point of view, does not mean I "know fuck-all about anything". I'm afraid you begin to sound like a zealot at that stage.
Morally bankrupt? It's a fucking OS. Get a grip. There's ideology, then there's zealotry. When you start talking about morals in the choice of as mundane a product as an OS, you've crossed the line into zealotry.
Every single day they do. Including the other person answering your post. And he's a Linux user.
And as soon as someone says something like that which contains any content and not just vague allusions, it will be credible.
There are plenty of admins (possibly most) that think Windows server is easier to use than Linux.
Ones that have inadequate experience with one platform or the other, maybe.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
All else being equal, meritocracy is a good thing. That's no longer true when it's used as a justification to abuse, berate, and generally be an asshole.
PS just out of interest what's your criteria for 'get things done'? Your garbage man gets things done; would you be OK if he calls publicly berated you in front of your peers as a brain-dead shithead for putting out 3 bags instead of 2?
Civility costs nothing, and there is no excuse for its absence.
He said servers NOT desktop problems. Ever hear of powershell? That little bugger tries to bring in CLI for something thats been GUI for decades.
You're not understanding the exact point Linux is trying to get across. You realize the fact that adding this to kernel space will allow foor secure boot to work from the kernel level, this -is- correct. The problem is allowing secure boot to work from the kernel level will mean everybody has to trust Microsoft, the only signing authority, and that many people will unknowingly be putting their trust in Microsoft. The problem arises when, once all these devices have secure boot and we have however many linux installs that accept this, that Microsoft up and revoke their blessing for some reason - all the sudden people can't install and worst case many existing installations could be crippled on reboot.
Linus is making the point that this should not be handled by the kernel to begin with - put it in userspace as an extension of the boot loader or something like that. Don't force it on people, and above all else *don't make the kernel reliant on it*.
Linux doesn't run at all in my business, my home or my datacenter with one exception, my ASUS N66 runs linux. Other than that, every router I own has some sort of BSD base to it (Thanks Juniper!), my phone, tablets and desktops do as well.
In short, if you live in a fanboy world where you want to see Linux all over the place, you will. Just like a Windows fanboy or an Apple fanboy.
Symbian was more popular than Linux for years by massive amounts, yet no one thinks of it as anything else.
When you give your shit away for free, its not impressive that a bunch of people use it or bits of it. Its only impressive if no one bothers to pay for an alternative, which I hate to break it to you, even when you get linux on your phone, you're paying for an alternative version of a free product.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
OS X seems to be what Gnome tried and failed to achieve: a nice-looking, comfortable desktop without a million config knobs that most people can use out of the box. As much as I like Linux-the-OS, I like using OS-X-the-Desktop.
GNOME 2 had started to get nice and stable so they had to screw it up. But if you use GNOME 2 with Compiz you get all the same stuff that the Mac gives you. You can even use avant-window-navigator to get a maclike dock. I've done all this, but right now I'm actually using Unity. Once you get used to it, it's fairly fluid. The only thing really needed is to map something to switch desktops, e.g. meta-Fkeys. But I have to say, the file manager is awful now. It is slower and more chokey than ever before. Why people have to keep taking DEs backwards on Linux I'll never know.
What I would like to see now is someone serious develop Android for the common PC. Android-x86 has failed me reliably. What they're doing may be very difficult, but that doesn't change how well they have to do it if it's going to be useful.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If by alone you mean with his wife, kids and friends at his bedside in his last moments of life, then sure, he died alone. We all do by that measure. And for the record, he too thinks the homeopathic thing was dumb as shit and was clear that no one should do that, he regretted it.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
This:
Microsoft just locked EVERYBODY OUT to charge RENT.
Does not follow with this:
Red Hat had the resources to build and certify THEIR OWN keys
Sounds more like Red Hat is being cheap and lazy, rather than anything Microsoft is doing.
Self censorship is a huge problem throughout organisations with people not being sure enough of themselves to say what they mean or think instead they couch replies in vague terms so as not to offend and hope for some sort of consensus.
Agree with this, but having one of the biggest leaders in the FOSS movement bite heads off when they don't like your idea isn't exactly a good way to foster expression.
I like that he says what he thinks. I'm not sure I like how he says it. I agree with his arguments in that thread, but the language could be toned down. That isn't self-censorship - it is just being civil.
And here is why.
How many years experience do you have of Windows admin?
Sorry, you're falling flat on your face for this one. Here's why:
When I ask the question, "How do change the screen resolution?" Windows: Control Panel
OK! I don't know where to click!
Just give me the directions to do it in:
* Windows XP
* Windows Vista
* Windows 7
* or perhaps Windows 8 (all variants)
I think that "It depends" would be a lot more honest answer.
> Update: 02/25 17:24 GMT by U L : The headline/article are misleading...
Change your passwords, everyone! Slashdot has obviously been bitten by the hackers that got into Facebook, Apple, and now Microsoft. Don't worry admins, I'm here to help. Fixing a misleading story? EDITING, fer chrissakes?!? NOT ON MY WATCH, YOU DON'T!
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
I wish I was good enough for Linus to insult me!
I understand where Linus is coming from, don't get your nickers in a twist - go back to fiddling with your iPad...
And don't lump ESR and RMS together - RMS is driven by principle, ESR is driven by pragmatism. RMS believes it's better to use bad software than non-free software. ESR believes open source leads to processes that produce high quality software.
Interesting. I'd say experience shows that open source works well for software with only technical requirements. Command line tools. Compilers. OS kernels. Implementations of documented protocols. File format converters. That sort of thing.
Open source tends to fail to produce high quality where there are subjective choices to be made. UIs. Apps. Partly because programmers make design choices which they are unqualified to make, and partly because the lack of organisation means that there's no house style and no common overarching conventions. And to some extent there's an arrogant rejection of the needs of anyone who's not as expert in the topic as the programmer himself.
You say RMS prefers free to good. Personally I'll take good over free any day.
Not on ARM you can't. http://readwrite.com/2012/01/13/microsoft-says-no-to-disabling
Hmm...
You forgot Android is Linux - or more precisely it uses the Linux kernel, just as Fedora, SuSE, and other Linux distributions do!
Linux based O/S's dominate the mobile & server markets.
That's exactly why you can't compare an operating system to an operating system kernel.
However, when Linux has come installed on PCs, users have tended to avoid them or return them. Remember the early netbooks shipped with Linux. They had a huge return rate, and it wasn't long till manufacturers withdrew then and replaced then with Windows based netbooks.
"How do I change screen resolution in BSD?"
"It depends, are you using MacOS X, or another type of BSD?"
"It's what we used back before tablets destroyed civilization and enslaved us."
Shades of megalomania
All PCs with UEFI are required to let the user disable Secure Boot. The only time Secure Boot is mandatory is on the ARM platforms that want Microsoft certification.
Haha, you actually think that just going into the Control Panel is sufficient to get the resolution set on a Windows installation? Oh no. No no no, no, that's not all, my friend.
So, let's take as an example my TV. I have a computer attached via HDMI to the TV. It picks a 4:3 resolution and the entire picture is shrunken; it doesn't fill the entire screen. Annoying.
You go into Control Panel. Or perhaps you're a "power user" and you decide to directly right-click the Desktop and get at the Resolution settings. Either one. You scroll through the list of modes. There are three dozen. You try them all individually. None of them correctly fill the entire screen without letterboxing, and all of them look somewhat shrunken still.
You pull out the TV's manual, sighing. Flipping through the pages, you finally find the one that lists the rather arcane timing numbers for the TV. Sure enough, the widescreen mode that this particular TV would like is not listed. You go back to your Control Panel, and decide that it's time to go into the driver-specific settings, promising yourself a cold one later.
Scrolling through the entire driver's settings panels, you eventually find information on over/underscan. For some unknown reason, the system has decided that your TV needs its scan adjusted by 8%. Setting it back to 0% unshrinks the display. Excellent. However, the mode is still wrong.
You continue to hunt through the driver's configuration, finding two spots where resolution can be chosen from a dropdown but no way to enter in manual timings. Rolling your eyes, you go through each of the three dozen possible configurations again, manually noting how close each one comes to filling the display and how badly the fonts are misrendered. Finally you come to one that nearly works, and resign yourself to having a slight letterbox on the top and bottom of your screen.
Meanwhile, that Linux laptop you have correctly finds the resolution on the first try, without any configuration needed. Your Linux workstation has the same problems as the Windows machine, but with a couple minutes of xrandr and Google, you've found a way to turn those arcane timing numbers in the TV's manual into a mode, and saved a shell script to do it for you should the need arise.
tl;dr: How do you change your screen resolution for Linux with Xorg? You don't need to, usually! If you do, xrandr. That's all.
~ C.
Yes, and Bit9 "The Leader in Trust-based Security" was hacked for 5 months before they realized it.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
...I had no idea he was a right wing nut, global warming and HIV denier, Bush jr supporter, islamophobic war-monger, homophobic, racist troll...Him and Stallman, what a pair!...
Him and Stallman? Fuck you and your guilt by association. Oh, if only the world were such a place that only people I find agreeable actually provided things of value to everyone (that's sarcasm, by the way)...
UEFI is too big. Even BIOS was too big. It got big because in the early days of PCs the OS depending on BIOS to do fundamental operations that typically is done in the OS on other types of systems. The only thing a BIOS or UEFI should do is to boot strap your OS and from then on it should not need to be used except to query hardware specific information.
YES YES! Tell them Linus! And, while your at it, why don't you personally resume development.
Excuse me but nobody wouldn't have privileges to change the screen res under Linux anyway.
"Microsoft the 'universal' control of any desktops PCs running with UEFI secure boot"
It goes against any good business models to give a OS developer Universal Control over the Secure Boot Keys. It seems to me that Monopolies are illegal in the USA.
This would not be the first time Microsoft try a digital coup. Remember IE hardwired into the OS.
You have to give Macintosh credit for not suing people for taking Mac hardware and installing other operating system on that hardware.
Only fair option is to have the hardware manufactures create a consortium that does not bias against the OS as long as it supports Secure Boot. It seems to me those consortium's seem to work very well in the open source community.
As a consumer we should just refuse to buy any hardware or support any OS's that do not support fair business practices.
--- Just my few bits in cyberspace.
I always liked Linux, using it dual with Windows. I thougt some of the MS haters were a bit too much. But this restricted boot thing has pushed me. I won't never recommend, or use if i can avoid, or buy an MS product again. They can just go and fsck themselves.
If the response you have to an average end user question is ever "put together a bash shell script," you are living in a fantasized reality.
Palladium.
You miss the point that Secure Boot will eventually be REQUIRED for things like HIPAA or PIC compliance. Certain agencies simply won't allow "insecure" machines and by not pushing back extra hard, Red Hat just gave up territory that won't ever get back.
How many business are going to take an admin seriously if he has to manually load a certificate to run Linux or BCD? .. When the same computer would run Windows Enterprise out-of-the-box without Mumbo-Jumbo?
I hate myself. I wish I were dead.
What I find mind boggling is that the European Union went after Microsoft for being anti-competitive regarding their IE-'browser', media-player, closed/non-disclosed API's, ...
But still not a word about the whole UEFI secure boot scam, which in my opinion tops all previous complaints.
Linux is a kernel. Not an OS.
Attempting to make the Linux kernel dependent on Microsoft is exacerbating a problem.
The "kernel kernel"? Either Linux is an OS, or it's a kernel. If it's the latter, your sentence should simply read "Attempting to make Linux dependent.."
If you're going to be anal retentive about the difference, try to stay consistent for more than a single sentence.
Bingo.
Intel wants this, too. Deep defender won't get further than any other Intel software strategy, tho'.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Someone needs to tell him that it's hard enough to get people to adopt your OS with 3 million competing distros, much less with the leadership of an egotistical ass who takes every opportunity to scream like bipolar child at anyone who tries to actually help.
Kluge up the kernel enough, and I'm sure the number of distros will come down significantly.
Yep, that'll drive business his way.
I'm not sure rationalwiki represents ESR very well. For example, for HIV, what's written in the sourced blog post is that he doesn't believe HIV is the* cause of AIDS.
It's a bit out there, but he's not exactly denying that HIV exists. For all we know, this is his reasoning for the enormous variances in incubation periods of HIV.
For those who don't quite get the difference, AIDS is a set of symptoms, while HIV is a virus. It is practically certain that HIV (the virus) is the cause of AIDS (the symptoms).
* English is a bit ambigious, but he basically says that he thinks the majority of AIDS cases is actually a result of something other than HIV.
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
He's also a fuckwit. I'd gladly take Stallman's pure ideology than that idiot's failed concoction of ideology and pragmatism.
Redhat? Cheap? Lazy?
Nonsense, the bug reports including patches to fix still sitting unactioned in Bugzilla for years is a sign of great responsiveness, not laziness!
The problem I'm trying to solve is "Don't permit Linux to be used as a bootloader for backdoored versions of other operating systems". Any other security benefit is a happy side effect.-- Matthew Garrett
"How do I pull out all login failures in the past 48 hours...?"
Windows: event log viewer, XML parsing, custom utility
Linux: It depends...
(cat, grep, awk, sort, uniq, and pipes)
The difference is any linux person capable of answering that question is competent to do so.
In windows, you'll have the fucking office manager struggling to paste something into powershell they read off of stack overflow.
Your admin may be a user, but if they have the understanding of a typical user, they shouldn't be your admin unless you're willing to sleep in the bed you made.
Absence of GUI isn't operating system failure, it's an online real-time competency test. If you can't operate without it, you failed.
Please understand, I like GUIs, I wish they were there for everything. I prefer to use a GUI to change my network and runlevel scripts. If I'm on a linux server with a GUI -- which is a security hole I'd never allow if I was the one that specified it. It's simply not woth the unecessary risk and wasted resources (human or computational).
But -- powershell or bash scripting is the mark of passing beyond mere basic competence.
If your windows admin can't look up your nameserver settings from the command line or powershell (and it isn't faster for them to do so there than via control panel) -- they should be replaced as soon as possible.
I am surprised that this answer is scored at 3... I expected more. But I guess that also tells me something about the people who are voting this up / down. Good answer.
Then they'll just move back to Windows (or stay with Windows, depending on the situation) and everyone will just deal with it like all compromises in life.
It's inevitable that Linux will be pushed off computers. It's like pushing against the ocean at this point - Microsoft has too much inertia and Linux has no ability to lobby. Might as well reacquaint yourselves with how Windows works and where all the options are. /only half-joking here - I really do think Linux will be eliminated in a few years time. Just accept it and move on.
Raenex is a dickhead
It's not like the guy posted a link to GOATSE or something.
And he probably should have. There are some vulgar
insult generators around that work OK too but I'll give
him credit for mildness where he deserves it.
+1 Internets for you, sir.
Fear based? More like, I got screwed and don't want it to happen again based.
That's because you are confusing operating systems with desktop environments. Linux is one operating system, but you can run many different desktop environments on it. The question should be "how do I change the screen resolution in KDE/Gnome/Unity/XFCE/LXDE/etc."? It is not a failure of the operating system to allow users the freedom to run what desktop environment they want on it.
how the successful companies do things
How 0.0001% of the successful companies do things, because believe it or not if you have profit of a billion dollars and end up #501, you're still pretty fucking successful.
Let me guess, you're one of those CVS fans?
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
That wasn't about the average case. In the average case, both Windows and Linux will bring up a display that fills the screen, after you install the appropriate driver for the card. The point of that comment is that Linux can make the difficult cases easier to deal with than the typical Window GUI, one that tries to hide the inherent complexity in things like TV output. I've spent plenty of time struggling to get video configuration working correctly under both Linux and Windows. On average I'd say it's harder in Linux, but when it doesn't work in Windows there's little you can do about it. There's always something you can do in Linux, the only question is how many resources you're willing to bring to bear on a problem.
The OS X kernel has a number of limitations compared the Linux one. Terrible filesystem choices is at the top of that list. HFS+ sucks hard, starting with the handling of upper/lower case names. Concurrency at high core counts is much better on Linux. There are some other things that are oddly slow on OS X too, like some of the memory and message passing interfaces. There are a whole lot of people who work on making Linux faster on a variety of environments, while Apple focuses on a relatively narrow chunk of desktop user cases. OS X is a pretty bad memory hog compared to a well configured Linux too.
On the flip side, I really wish Linux had the OS X DTrace interface and its associated tools. RedHat and other vendors have dumped so much time into cloning that badly with Systemtap.
Linux will be pushed off computers because Microsoft has too much power? It's hard to take that idea seriously even as a bit of a joke here in 2013, as MS struggles to release any sort of compelling product. I've been making a living working on open-source projects for 15 years now, and there has never been this much wide-spread adoption of Linux. Everyone from giant enterprises to little web app startups have a Linux web server somewhere, just like they probably have an Exchange mail server. The rise of Android phones in particular has been a huge PR win for Linux.
As for high security environments, that crowd has been burned so many times now by zero-day Windows exploits and holes in desktop software that they're giving up on trying. I do database consulting, and I'm moving everything from anti-virus vendors to defense contractors over to Linux now. The terror of Windows 8 plus the new Office licensing terms were the last straw for a lot of them.
For normal office workers, Firefox/Chrome plus a web mail client work just fine now. Google Docs is fine for simple tasks, and OpenOffice is good enough for a lot of medium scale issues. (Real MS Office is only needed for the most complicated work) Linux has never been more competitive compared to Microsoft's offerings than now. Every time a useful app is written inside of a web browser, the reason to use Microsoft drops a little. And that's where a lot of business oriented development is moving now.
Hell, even the command line isn't consistent for this, Debian has one way, fairly straightforward and stable. RedHat has a totally different one and has changed it sometime in the past few years, other distros have still different config files.
Very very rarely have I seen Theo blow up at someone where it is not warranted. Especially the big companies that lie and lie again to him.
BIOS was IBM not Microsoft and UEFI is also run on Mac's no? (then again Apple is/was owned partly by MSFT)
MSFT own no part of APPL. The stock the bought was none voting so they had no say in the operation of apple. Furthermore that stock was sold years ago.
That's funny. I watched the video and came to the opposite conclusion. I liked the fact that he knew what was stupid and didn't have time to cover it up in nice words. Was there anything he said that you actually _disagreed_ with? Right.
some would argue that the linux desktop you speak of wouldn't really be linux at all because it cannot be modified...not with binary blobs all over. thus, switching to a bsd-like license would effectively kill the linux desktop.
If you're using your hands you're doing it wrong.
1. the hardware isn't 'designed' to run windows 8. it's locked TO windows 8. the hardware isn't designed to run windows 8 any more than it was designed to use linux.
2. not buying hardware/voting with wallet is not a real choice unless you consider giving up what you want as valid.
Rather made his point though, dinnit?
eh he was always like this.. it's just that today's society has become so pantywaisted and spineless, it seems like he's worse than he is.
Of course. 'professionalism' today means a grandiose sense of accomplishment and self importance. It used to have something to do with relative performance compared with peers. I can see why populations that respect objectivity and correctness would have trouble respecting the term or the people who trot it out as 'proof' of their 'superiority.'
Yeah I know, so why are you so hung up on the delivery system?
I know ESR and he's no racist. He's a bit of a loon, but not a racist.
I'm not sure rationalwiki represents ESR very well
It doesn't "represent" anyone, let alone doing it well. It's a leftard bitchfest site.
Android is just as fragmented and inconsistent as Linux is, if not, more so.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Um... "package management" on OS X is mostly a case of drag/drop app bundle. For the stuff that installs plists they're easily located under either your, or the system library folder. Package management on unix is a farce - packages drop configuration files wherever they like, executables wherever they like, pull in dependencies you don't want, etc.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Agreed, FS is a weak point and its maybe not quite so fast. But the other features Linux plain does not have more than make up for it in my book. You can cheaply throw more cpu and ram at an os x box. You can't magically throw dtrace or quartz or the library of cocoa apps at a linux box.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
You don't get the level of consistency across all your apps with regards to menu options. You don't get the gesture support. You don't get the systemwide 3d acceleration or the display PDF. You don't get automator or any equivalent to applescript for inter-application scripting. There's a heap of places Gnome is nowhere even close.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
OK, tell me a way i can create a folder action in Gnome to auto-convert a any videos I dump into it into a different format? It is literally about 1 minute of work in OS X with automator and zero code-writing is required, it's a series of drag and drop actions. OS X's gui is barely scratching the surface, and Gnome doesn't even really match OS X on that front. If you dig a little deeper into the sytem services, it's not even in the same decade. Neither is Windows for that matter.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
They can always buy a mac, which WILL let you boot other OSes :D
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
I've never had a catastrophic disaster in my server room either, but I still back up to tape and ship off site.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
A 12 bay NAS barely qualifies as a player in the "storage market". Something that size is hardly what I'd call "dominating the storage market". Wake me up when there's a product on the market that scales to multiple PB.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Whether or not i actually agree with his point is irrelevant. Acting that way on a development mailing list for an OS that is attempting to be mainstream and used by real companies just makes him (and by association, the LKML) look like a fuckwit.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Hi Microsoft,
I love google, cause you are sometimes so evil such a big dk.
No need thanks.
That's because Microsoft is only in phase 2: Extend.
They've already Embraced.
I wonder what phase 3 will be ...
"Where do I change my network settings?"
Windows: Control Panel
Mac: System Preferences
Linux: It depends
The reason Windows and Mac and Android are dominating user devices is because they have standardized a GUI environment, and GUI failure is considered operating system failure.
Duh.. "Linux" is a kernel, no more, no less.
Your answer should be:
Ubuntu: System Preferences
Fedora: System Preferences
So your original criticism falls flat. It's as easy to configure the screen resolution or network settings in Ubuntu and Fedora as in MacOS X or Windows.
Close button, maximize button. Dragging wIndow borders grow them. Dragging a window titlebar moves the window. And so on.
The concepts are consistent throughout. Anyone who is familiar with Windows needs maybe a day or two of self-paced exploration with some Linux distribution, and they're all set.
As for the "training the support staff that deals with end user support, automating testing suites for usability and bug tracking, unit testing, how to pass software updates, how to maintain backwards compatibility between distro upgrades" - what are you talking about? End users? Developers? This is what distributions do. You as the end user do not need to do this. Of course you can, if you really, really want to.
If you move from Debian to Centos to Slackware to Arch to Mint to SuSE: if you use KDE and the same theme, it looks and feels the same. If you use Gnome and the same theme it looks and feels the same. If you use Xfce and the same theme it looks and feels the same. If you mix and match these they will look the same based on your theme. So what is really your point?
You do not and should not install new stuff just because it's "new". This renders backwards compatibility point moot: either you need the new features, or you don't. If you need it, you upgrade and accept that something might change, in which case you learn the new thing. It's not the end of the world. If you don't need it, then don't upgrade.
Teach people the concepts, not to automatically and brainlessly click on a certain-color box in a certain place.
What is wrong/unpleasant in that video? I didn't watch the entire video as it is so long, I watched only random parts of it, but IMHO he sounded quite pleasant in it.
Maybe this is some kind of cultural thing, because I am Finnish. On the other hand, I find that sometimes he uses a bit too harsh language on mailing lists.
Sure, secure boot can be disabled. For now. That won't last long. Or do you really believe it will remain unchanged? This is MS here, dude. Do not ever expect better things of them.
And when that happens it will be way too late to do anything.
No one has ever proven or even credibly suggested that Windows or OSX is easier to use than Linux
I'll prove it to you right here, right now.
1: Procedure to use Windows
Go into computer store, buy computer, take it home, turn it on. Wait for it to boot.You are now using Windows.
2: Procedure to use Linux ...
Go into computer store, buy computer, take it home, turn it on. Find out where to download a Linux distro from. Download enough to do network install. Burn it on a CD. Boot from the CD. Select installation options
Need I continue?
And yes, I do realise that isn't what you meant, but the proof it still valid, and explains why Windows has approximately 100 times as many users as GNU/Linux on the desktop, and will have for the foreseeable future.
You don't get the level of consistency across all your apps with regards to menu options.
Yes, yes you do. The only app on my Ubuntu system whose menus do not go where they are "supposed" to is Steam. Period, the end, full stop it is the only program I've run across which is like that. If that's as much as I've encountered, how much do you think the average user will encounter? Also, I've run Unix ports on Mac and had their menu bar not relocate. In fact, though this may be an artifact of the last time I had to get some OSX on me, I've seen several programs on Mac not have the proper menu bar, and I've seen only one program on Ubuntu do it.
You don't get the gesture support.
Unless you install one of the many options, like EasyStroke.
You don't get the systemwide 3d acceleration or the display PDF.
Display PDF adds nothing to my existence. I do have systemwide gpu acceleration, that's what compiz is for, and also the acceleration support in font rendering libraries, etc. (You really believed that thing about "3d acceleration"? Not everything the GPU does is 3d. There's been 2d primitive acceleration in video drivers on PCs since Windows 3.1.
You don't get automator or any equivalent to applescript for inter-application scripting.
You don't get scripting on Linux? Snicker, snort, guffaw.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Android is just as fragmented and inconsistent as Linux is, if not, more so.
That's just a dumb thing to say, not least because Linux is part of Android. But especially because OSX is also fragmented; there are many versions of OSX still in the wild, and compatibility is an issue. When you come up with an argument that actually applies, let me know.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I'm not saying it's a failure of the individual programs... the tools exist to build for one narrow purpose (like one or two versions of the same distro). I'm saying the "Linux Desktop" as a concept and as a platform is a failure. It is designed to fail.
With any other operating system, there's a major and and a minor version number that is pretty much all the information you need as a target platform. There's a default GUI setup that is exactly the same across all new installs, and that's a platform that can be tested and built upon. Since "Linux Desktop" can mean so many things it is meaningless.
I'm not talking about just the location of the control panel. I'm talking about how services are started and maintained. I'm talking about what directories programs are installed in. I'm talking about different security models. I think there is actually consensus that the term "Linux Desktop" is a useless phrase, so if that's understandable, accepting the fact that it isn't anything resembling a stable target platform shouldn't be far behind.
I had never seen Linus before so I decided to watch the video you linked. I did not get the feeling that he was a dick.
My impression was that he had done some public speaking before but there was an element of discomfort at first. He was definitely harsh on CVS and SVN. I suspect it was not quite as funny as he was hoping it would be.
Honestly, he seems to be a very open and readable person with no cloak and dagger political backstabbing bullshit. I have no idea if I would like him as a personal friend but I definitely like him as a person now.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
That's kind of hypothetical, because I've never seen Debian break in a production environment, ever.
So I guess all those release critical bugs in stable were reported for hypothetical reasons? Get real, shit breaks.
Maybe, but there is a certain amount of etiquette expected of professionals. It's like nobody bothers to teach their kids good manners anymore and those kids end up throwing vulgar insults at each other as adults even in a professional environment.
You say RMS prefers free to good. Personally I'll take good over free any day.
I'm not sure whether you're missing the difference between libre and gratis, or whether you just don't value freedom.
Compare what you said with "at least when Mussolini was in charge, the trains ran on time".
Caving in to Microsoft is exactly the goal, by Microsoft. The entire UEFI Secure Boot issue is another attempt by Microsoft to control hardware, when they are a software company. While I can see benefits of trying to comply with Microsoft, I don't think it's the right thing especially for the end users because it sacrifices end users freedom to use their machine as they intend. Microsoft wants control over this, and we should not allow it. Unfortunately, PC vendors already have allowed it and passed this along to the users. I think the only real reason a user would need to have Secure Boot working is on a dual boot system. How about scrapping Windows, disable Secure Boot, and install your favourite flavor of GNU/Linux and call it good. If you need Windows, spin up a VM in VirtualBox and away you go.
Erm...no. You are wrong.
Um... "package management" on OS X is mostly a case of drag/drop app bundle.
What's the OS X action for "upgrade every piece of software on my system at once"?
Package management on unix is a farce - packages drop configuration files wherever they like, executables wherever they like,
That's an interesting and novel assertion. Got any evidence that this has every happened?
pull in dependencies you don't want, etc.
By definition, you want dependencies as your stuff won't work without them.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
See what you can accomplish without calling someone a dick sucking cunt?
Amazing that this is so beyond the capabilities or comprehension of Linus....
What ever happened to articles that are unbiassed and dont cater to idiot minds that drool over other peoples conflicts. Now i can just read the title and assume Torvalds is a dick.
Windows 8 is unsurpassed by it's potential to be completely wiped off a hard drive. Really, it's AMAZING!
Actually, that statement about diet is wrong. Dr. Warburg learned in the 20's that cancer gets its nutrition from glucose. Glucose comes from carbohydrates, and protein, but not much from fat, just enough from the liver to keep the brain functioning.
In the last couple years, finally a team of doctors in Germany decided to study and see what happens if you lower carbs.
They got 25 volunteers, but could not put them on the diet until they were declared doomed by conventional doctors. They were so sick they started dying within 72 hours.
Of the 25 they only saved 5, but the normal result would be 25 dead, not 20.
However, you nicely parrot conventional wisdom, which is so good the entire USA is suffering from failed health with the recommended high carb diet.
I get the joke, but must reply with yet another!
"How do I change the screen resolution in Unix?"
"It depends, are you using MacOS X, or another type of Unix, which does not include Linux?"
Oh, I understand exactly what the OSS community means by it. I just don't buy it.
If I buy a toaster, I don't expect to get the circuit diagrams and plans to make my own variants on that toaster. And lets face it almost nobody would be interested in those plans anyway.
And then you compare it with Italian fascism? How utterly ridiculous. And almost a Godwin.
Fuck dual-booting. Fuck secure boot.
Linux shouldn't care about people who want to dual boot their systems. The method of choice today is virtual machines. So forget about dual-booting - it's an obsolete technology that shouldn't control how the OS is designed.
Forget secure boot. This is going to be bypassed by someone anyway - someway, sometime. Let Linux users turn it off in the hardware BIOS and forget about it. People who think their computer's security is going to depend on this secure boot technology are living in a fool's paradise. Even if the technology is not actually cracked and bypassed directly, the mere complexity of the OS and the applications running on top it means it's going to be bypassed de facto in user space just as it is today.
Do we really need all this extra complexity and ONE COMPANY owning the "keys to the kingdom" (literally) - especially as someone pointed out, anyone with a credit card can get a key signed by them or just steal the key from them - just to deal with boot loader malware and the odd occasion when some hacker gets physical access to the machine and boots a Linux Live CD?
Seriously?
I go along with Linus on this - this is nonsense from Microsoft for Microsoft's own agenda and people who have been brainwashed into thinking secure boot must be mandatory are basically idiots who don't understand security at all.
I'm someone who goes against the current infosec mantra that security controls should not interfere with business goals. I think security goals are by definition PART of a business' goals. But in this case I think the complexity and lack of cost-benefit of this particular security technology should rule it out.
If you want secure boot, then make it totally VENDOR-INDEPENDENT. That's the only way this is going to work.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
RedHat is only big with a small group of Enterprises more interested in red tape and bureaucracy than getting work done. RedHat would have no product without Linus.
That.... is just a really stupid statement. No way does this deserve to stay at +5.
The difference is that Linus gets angry at things that are worth getting angry about.
Why all the swearing? Isn't Torvalds smart enough to express the exact same idea in a civil manner? To think that there was a big ruckus when Dujardin said "Putain".
-- Did you try Tao3D? http://tao3d.sourceforge.net
OK, to some extent I'm just stating RMS's position, not my own here. I do use non-free software, and I don't sweat too much about it.
However, I do get frustrated when software goes wrong -- or could just benefit from minor new features -- and I can't do anything about it.
I do, actually, expect to be able to repair a toaster. Fortunately most toasters (assuming a simple toaster that's not microprocessor controlled) are simple enough that you don't *need* a circuit diagram -- you can just look at the circuit itself. There is no "compiler" which (as a side effect of its primary function) obfuscates the design. I suppose that's analogous to software written in a non-compiled language.
You might be upset (or maybe you've got used to it!) if a toaster manufacturer went out of their way to make the toaster non-user-serviceable, so you had to go to the manufacturer for repairs, rather than get your own soldering iron out, or going to an independent electrical repair shop. I gather petrol-heads are have been hit by this issue recently -- and have sought legislation to prevent it.
Yeah, but that's a false choice, since there's a third option.
I don't think it's much to ask for someone to be both civil and frank and transparent.
So how come we don't see anyone singing Steve Jobs' praise around here?
The hell with Dilbert, there should be a Linus calendar...
I unfortunately agree. Perhaps his more emotive output just gets a wider airing, but every time I hear quotes from Linus these days, he's 'blasting' someone for their opinion, riddled with sexual expletives. He wrote a brilliant OS kernel, but that doesn't stop him from being a dick, and sadly, thats exactly how he comes across to me these days.
Since the Garratts were locomotives built to be looking two ways !!
Seriously, all this secureboot nonsense only amounts to security via obscurity if the root key is also allowed to sign microsoft operating systems.
Any security you configure on a dual boot system will be compromised, as soon as you fire up windows.
Let's keep these patches out until someone really needs them, and in those cases, why can't they just patch their kernel?
Unlike Linus, Guido is stupid.
He was kind to CVS and SVN. Far too kind. That shit needs to be drug out back and shot.