Slashdot Mirror
Linux 3.14 Kernel Released
An anonymous reader writes "The Linux 3.14 "Shuffling Zombie Juror" kernel has been released. Significant improvements to Linux 3.14 include the mainlining of SCHED_DEADLINE, stable support for Intel Broadwell CPU graphics, Xen PVH support, stable support for ZRAM, and many other additions. There's also a tentative feature list on KernelNewbies.org."
Yay! We've finally reached that!
They should have released it on Pi Day
We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
A Mac with the tech specs to an equivalent PC also costs double price.
The Intel Broadwell CPU has got a machine code pseudo random number generator in it's extended instruction set! Immense! Gimme Gimme Gimme ...
The purpose of existence is to make money.
"Oh, hey, I think the toy computers are fighting again..."
-Servers, Compute Clusters, Storage Systems, et al.
You guys keep working on that. Meanwhile Apple will continue selling millions more Macbooks and Mac Pro's to hard core developers, scientists and engineers who have work to do and need a computer to get it done with.
You do realise that almost all of the top 500 supercomputers run Linux
as do billions of Android phones...
The Antibufferbloat draw my attention...
Maybe it will be worth using at home for my custom fw/gateway.
at the end of page
I use tmpfs a lot, but why would I use memory as swap space? Reading the Wikipedia article doesn't convince me, why not provide any swap space in the first place?
I remember installing the 0.99.14 kernel in 1993. SLS Linux. My first distribution. So in more than 20 years we only went up 3 versions??!!
The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
You guys keep working on that. Meanwhile Apple will continue selling millions more Macbooks and Mac Pro's to hard core developers, scientists and engineers who have work to do and need a computer to get it done with.
You do realise that almost all of the top 500 supercomputers run Linux
You do realize that even if all of the top 500 supercomputers ran Linux, it would still only be a mere 500 computers doing real work, compared to millions of Macs?
and millions of TV's
Linux won and no one noticed...
and people who make silly youtube videos
You guys keep working on that. Meanwhile Apple will continue selling millions more Macbooks and Mac Pro's to hard core developers, scientists and engineers who have work to do and need a computer to get it done with.
Not scientists surely. It's the gay arty-farty type who use Macbooks
Congrats on all your shitty media consumption devices!
The rest of us will do real work on real operating systems.
Not true. There are plenty of completely heterosexual arty-farty-type people who use Macbooks too - they merely seem gay.
My colleague is a Linux Zealot. I use a Mac. I am at least 2.5-3 times more productive than he is.
Linus Torvalds is much more productive than you. He uses Linux. You should definitely switch.
Seriously, my car also costs 15 times a much as my bike but it also gets more done.
You're not coming across as a "different tools for different jobs" kind of a person. This makes me inclined to believe that you're the zealot not your coworker. Bikes and cars do not fit in the same categories and neither is a replacement for the other.
Also, my Macbook Pro is 7 years old and looks like new.
So?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Well, no. It does not.
systemd targets can only do so much.
I thought we were up to 3.4.something.
Now we're back to 3.14?
Also, my Macbook Pro is 7 years old and looks like new.
So?
And here we have the crux of the Mac v. Linux argument.
Like those that run the world's best supercomputers?
I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
You guys keep working on that. Meanwhile Apple will continue selling millions more Macbooks and Mac Pro's to hard core developers, scientists and engineers who have work to do and need a computer to get it done with.
Well, it faster, it better and it more reliable. Or would you save money from OS if you splashed billions on supercomputers?
It looks like it transparently compresses pages going to swap, it's not like you need a SEPARATE block device to be your 'zswap' device.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Linux 3.14159265358979323846264338327950288...
And here we have the crux of the Mac v. Linux argument.
Well not really. I'm not the kind of person who believes that CPU speed is the only spec that matters,
A 7 year old machine is getting quite long in the tooth. At 7 years old, compared to a new machine, it will be slow, limited RAM, heavy, have a completely usless spinning optical drive, a slow, spinning hard disk near the end of its servicable life on the end of a slow SATA link almost certainly an ageing battery and by modern standards a rather anemic sceen resolution and the backlight will be faded out considerably. And it will be heavy too.
At 7 years on it won't be a good machine in any regards, unless the author has spent a good deal on upgrades in which case it's hardly a 7 year old machine and substantially more expensive too.
Also, I frankly don't believe the author that it "looks like new" unless he's never used it as a laptop (i.e. carried it around). Cases (even metal ones) get scratched. Keys get dirty because even clean fingers have grease on. Things get worn if they're exposed to the environment. And if it hasn't been, well, my that's a pointless statement since anything untouched will look like new in 7 years except food.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Not true. There are plenty of completely heterosexual arty-farty-type people who use Macbooks too - they merely seem gay.
Maybe that's just their dating schtick. They understand the height of the female ego and are betting that a woman will try to "convert" them.
My Dell Dimension P90 is about 20 years old and looks like new. Must mean that a Pentium box running Windows 98 is shit tons better than your Macbook Pro. Oh hey, my TRS-1000 looks pretty new too...
Let's see how much you get done on your Macs if we take away all of those Linux servers that aren't doing "real work"
What is slow bloated and buggy about X?
I have exactly 70 megs of resident memory usage and 250 megs of virtual memory space allocated for my X server.
It is currently running 20-30 shells, two VMs (taking up ~3 gigs of RAM), an Atlas program, and AWeather, a NOAA based weather program.
And I'm currently typing this reply in one of those VMs with a cursor rate as fast as as if I was typing inside a native window.
And all of this is on a single core processor with 6 gigs of ram.
So excuse me if I call bullshit on your 'unproductive because he's running linux' analogy. While *A PARTICULAR* linux distro, desktop environment, etc may be much slower or less productive than a Mac, there are plenty of us with linux setups that are multiple times faster and more productive than we could get on a Mac, current version of Windows, or even on a 'default-setting' mainstream linux distro, such as Fedora/RHEL/CentOS, Debian/Ubuntu, or (Open)SuSE.
Making broad generalizations like that just shows you haven't taken the time to investigate Desktop optimizations that could make you more productive on linux, just like I haven't invested in discovering new Windows/Mac optimizations to compare against my linux setup.
That said, if you stop treating your mac like a hammer, maybe you'll find some projects that linux would act as a better screwdriver for :)
ls! :)
And get paid to do it?
Unless you are doing desktop support (which doesn't pay) or developing applications that will run directly on the devices that sit in front of users (which can pay very well or not at all), you will likely be doing backroom work, where Linux dominates. Backroom work pays nicely and there's lots of it. True, one can do backroom work from a Mac easily enough, but a Linux desktop has its productivity advantages, like being able to spin up dozens of LXC containers in a way that mirrors the production environment, which is exactly the reason why my work desktop is a Linux box.
If your work is aimed at desktop support of Macs or developing applications for Apple products, a Mac makes sense, as does a Windows box for Windows work, but the amount of real work opportunities I'm seeing with Linux has grown a great deal in the last five years, like quadrupled. We're not talking about a tiny slice of the pie anymore. It's significant and growing fast.
Not to side with the hoard of mac trolls in this thread . . . but Linux systems tend to be pretty pricy too. Also, the "double price" is not entirely honest. Computer models tend to get more expensive per hardware capability near the end of their life. That's far from Apple specific, and it's very easy to pick out the cheapest, newer pc model against an old mac line right before an update. Sure you can conjure up numbers that make it look double. But when you factor in computer support, making informed purchases (like buying after soon a model update, and buying cheaper RAM from a reputable 3rd party), and software (bloatware subsidizing some PCs vs hardware subsidizing software), Macs are not terribly far from PCs in terms of price vs specs. Same goes for vendor supplied Linux PCs. Quality just isn't cheap. And no, I'm not biased towards Apple; I'll just as happily use BSD, Linux, or even Windows 7.
I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
Out of the box rt YAHOO. Let the games begin...OR more to the point for those who could care less about gaming but record music, stream transcoded AV and do serious studio work LINUX will knock it out of the park! Provided ALSA, THE PULSE MONSTER, Rosegarden, Audacity, Ardour retool to use the rt headers correctly so the linux install does not have to have a hacked up security_limits.conf and a patched kernel. HALLELUJAH I say. Mind you one still might have to increase the frequency from stock 250 to 1000 for their install. Modern systems with higher bus speeds should handle this change but it might not sit to well on slower older hardware like a year 2000 P111 or older.
I have been running rt since the early days and have always felt like having to tweak a kernel just to obtain low latency was a road block for the future of Linux.
This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
The current x86 instruction set is already so vast it past "extended" about 10 years ago and is way too complex for most humans to grok in its entirety. Its the C++ of assembly languages these days. I'm not sure adding ever more instructions is really the way forward. x86 was always CISC but even so , seems to me intel has deliberately taken the RISC how-to manual and never mind ignored it, they've set light to it with a blowtorch then pissed all over the ashes afterwards. Even their early decisions were dubious - have a register based cpu , need a maths co-pro , shall we make it register based? Nah , lets go for a stack based architecture just to make assembly coders lives 10x more difficult. Genius! Not.
Running on a supercomputer is not a sign of a good general purpose OS; supercomputers are usually homogeneous sets of well-defined hardware, and typically have front ends which hide the internals from the outside-facing attack surface.
A good general purpose operating system survives arbitrary hardware connection and disconnection and arbitrary user activity. Linux can be configured to be a reasonable approximation of a good general purpose operating system, but there is no need to do that on supercomputers, where unneded drivers and subsystems are just resource drains.
You would not be happy with a supercomputer OS on your laptop, since it probably lacks any USB, audio, or graphical display support, and your laptop is unlikely to have infiniband or whatever hardware.
That Linux makes a good supercomputer OS is mostly because of its generality and openness, however the kernels in almost all of the relevant Top-500 are far from generic.
Sure, it may not make sense for everyone, but I bet there are cases that will see significant gains.
For example, imagine you're running a server with too much data to fit in RAM uncompressed but a lot more (maybe all of it) will fit in RAM if you compress it. So by doing compressed swap, you spend a bit of CPU power (to do the compression/decompression) to avoid a lot of waiting on I/O.
Sure, if you put in a bunch more RAM you could fit it all, but that might require buying new hardware, or maybe you've already hit the limit of what's available and still want more performance.
I don't know about 7 years old being BAD per say, I have a toshiba laptop that i bought 6-7 years ago, and despite it being a core duo, i think it still runs great.
the hard drive part I will agree with, but that is a easy fix, a sata-usb cable costs $25 (including drive clone software) and a 1TB HD is around $100
I paid around $600 for this laptop, and i think it run circles around some of the budget laptops out now. the ONLY upgrade i've done is the hard drive, and i might think of the battery sometime, but it stays plugged in most of the time, so not too important.
not a big gamer, but i have a HTPC that is WAY over Spec'ed, would rather game on that anyway.
Hi troll, have a sandwich.
Linux *is* better, faster, and more reliable.
And here we have the crux of the Mac v. Linux argument.
Well not really. I'm not the kind of person who believes that CPU speed is the only spec that matters,
A 7 year old machine is getting quite long in the tooth. At 7 years old, compared to a new machine, it will be slow, limited RAM, heavy, have a completely usless spinning optical drive, a slow, spinning hard disk near the end of its servicable life on the end of a slow SATA link almost certainly an ageing battery and by modern standards a rather anemic sceen resolution and the backlight will be faded out considerably. And it will be heavy too.
At 7 years on it won't be a good machine in any regards, unless the author has spent a good deal on upgrades in which case it's hardly a 7 year old machine and substantially more expensive too.
Also, I frankly don't believe the author that it "looks like new" unless he's never used it as a laptop (i.e. carried it around). Cases (even metal ones) get scratched. Keys get dirty because even clean fingers have grease on. Things get worn if they're exposed to the environment. And if it hasn't been, well, my that's a pointless statement since anything untouched will look like new in 7 years except food.
Further to your points about the stylish mac users comments right now I am running Mint 16 DEBIAN on an IBM T42 from 2005. It has 1.5 meg of ram a long in the tooth 48 meg onboard radion 7500 vid. The processor is not even pae for crying out loud and I can still run GOOGLE EARTH 6 .386 AND SPIN THE GLOBE ON LINUX WHILE I POST THIS DITTY RUNNING SPINNING GLOBE ON A SECOND DISPLAY FROM THE VGA PORT.
The nine cell aftermarket battery still gets me 4-6 hours depending on air time with the agb wireless. MIND you I only do this at a maximum 1024x768 as I write music notation or whatever on this little gem of a computer with Open Source Software or do whatever kind of correspondence in any file format you want. PDFs, XLS, .DOCX it does not matter I can create it all effectively with several different pieces of software, heck I can even transcode short .MOV vids in 720p on this little gem without taxing the proc too much
EAT YOUR HART out Windows and MAC users. I am not kidding... LINUX IS GETTING THAT FAR AHEAD OF YOU. And with the addition of stable 3.14 RT kernel out of the box it will only get better.
And that is the beauty of Linux in general the more you keep up with the Jones' Apple and Windows users sell off your old 'puters dirt cheap the better Linux gets! OUT OF THE BOX with Linux this little laptop (tm)Linux Just Works with a well done nonpae capable distro. Of course if you do not understand what I just posted take off your glasses and read it carefully for it is the truth. Linux users can do stuff with older hardware that you can without paying a frigging fortune to do it!! And that is why helping out the people who build OSS like Linux is a great thing. PERIOD EOF
This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
I've got an Acer laptop I bought in 2005. It has a 2.6 GHz Celeron--living proof that they did, once upon a time, make computers with only one CPU!--and 2 GB RAM. The CD-ROM drive is toast, and more than about 30 minutes of full-screen video heats it up to the point where I have to let it cool off for a few minutes; otherwise it does pretty well, all things considered. Not sure why I keep it around except that it still runs.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
... all the while running Linux on their servers.
For desktops, Microsoft, secondarily Apple. Linux can be used as a desktop if need be, but for the most part, for ease of management in the enterprise, Windows is top dog.
For servers, it can be a toss-up. Likely a hybrid environment is best because some applications like Splunk seem to be happiest on Linux.
For appliances, dedicated devices, and other items, there is no contest -- Linux is the primary [1] solution. It may not be perfect, but it is the one that is the most popular, and there are many tools available to use.
[1]: QNX is a very good tool, but from what other /. posters say about the cost of a development kit and built tools, the cost to play in the Neutrino ball game can be quite steep.
Above post proves that some persons are willing to pay a lot more for the same tools as those who use the best practices of resource management.
And that some people cannot make the distinction between effective workflows and good tools.
It is easy to be inefficient on a Linux box. Move that user to a Mac or Windows box, and a strange thing happens. He will be just as inefficient when measured by time. However he will be much more inefficient when measured by total cost of his output.
In conclusion, the easy way to increase the inefficiency in a workflow is to buy expensive computers for the most inefficient personnel. This stimulates the economy. The cost of this stimulation is borne by the companies that use this tactic and shows up as a decrease in competitive advantages. But it is all done for the greater glory of Apple and Microsoft so it is all good.
Will
LMAO!
Linus Torvalds is much more productive than you. He uses Linux. You should definitely switch.
To be fair, Linus Torvalds uses a MacBook Air. Though he probably has linux on it.
Does anyone know how they measure latency? I read one of the papers, some went above my head, but the gist that I got was this new algorithm can adjust to changing bandwidth, which is detected via "latency". I understand that a machine can measure its own internal queuing latency, but how are they measuring the queuing latency of the upstream?
Do they actively ping a remote device, like the first hop, or is this tracked per TCP session, which would mean it's stateful.
A 7 year old machine is getting quite long in the tooth.
Maybe, maybe not. Per-core performance has basically flat-lined for the last 7 years. Long-gone are the days where clock speeds doubled every 12-18 months or where buying a new PC would get you something that ran 4-8x faster then the one you had from 3-4 years ago.
At the moment, I'm still using a 2007-era Thinkpad T61p (Core2 Duo 2.2GHz, 8GB RAM, Win7 Pro, SSD). It originally shipped with WinXP, 4GB RAM and a 7200 RPM HD. This is still the machine I use for the majority of my work.
The main advantage I have is that before the 4yr warranty ran out, I made *sure* to have it serviced, so it has a new backlight, new keyboard (which was acting up), etc.
Is it slow? Eh, the CPU is not the zippiest and I would definitely prefer a faster quad-core, but it still works well enough that I'm not ready to spend $2200 on a new Thinkpad. I have a much more powerful desktop sitting beside me for things that need raw CPU power.
Really, the thing that makes it still usable is the SSD. Without that I would have given up on it years ago. It's why we are putting SSDs on all the desktops at the office. With a good SSD, you spend a lot less time twiddling your fingers and less fear that if you do X that you can't do Y at the same time because of disk contention.
Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
And I've got a 2004 Sony VAIO laptop, with a 1.7GHz celeron, 1GB of RAM (it can't take more; damned address lines), and a stunning 1920x1200 17" LCD display (sticker said Radeon 9700, HW diagnostics say Radeon 9600). Its battery is still the original, and has almost as much capacity as when it was new. I did replace the HDD though; the 80GB disk it came with (biggest option at the time) was way too small after a few years. It runs Xubuntu, and it goes quite well.
I haven't worked with any of the top tier supercomputers, although I have (albiet cursory) worked in HPC environments running linux. The environment was very heterogeneous in terms of available hardware, permissible job parameters, and user groups.
I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
Spewing yet another useless iOS app is not what I call "real work"...
It was supposed to come out on March 14... ;-)
01/01/01
I'm currently doing my daily emerge (update \in Gentoo) on a Powerbook, so obviously my testicles are larger.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
Maybe, maybe not. Per-core performance has basically flat-lined for the last 7 years. Long-gone are the days where clock speeds doubled every 12-18 months or where buying a new PC would get you something that ran 4-8x faster then the one you had from 3-4 years ago.
It's slowed but not stalled. CPU benchmarks indicate a difference of about 1.5 to 3, the latter sue it seems to memory bandwidth and more if special instructions are involved. For laptops the difference is bigger since the much reduced power consumption means you get a lot more computing for given batteries.
For multithread stuff, new CPUs are massively faster. Many things are multithreaded now.
But yes a decent 7 year old machine is usable. For something I'm lugging round, newer is very preferable.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Mmmm Kernel Pi.
And realize that the user base for those 500 supercomputers is maybe 7-800 people.... in the world. And that's not considering those folks are constantly in tune with kernel and code day and night.
I'm currently doing my daily emerge (update \in Gentoo) on a Powerbook, so obviously my testicles are larger.
I don't complain an old 14 incher is plenty even if it is non pae! Obviously your wallet is thicker than mine though. This little romance only cost 75 bucks. A roll in the hay with a good serviceable IBM CHIPPY powerbook from the same time frame in computing history is usually 3 to four times that much. With or without hdd jobs.
This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
on Debian based distributions like Ubuntu and Mint is described here: http://goo.gl/eMwXMs
My Raspberry Pi has better specs and only uses about 5 watts of power.
You should consider upgrading - even if only to save on your electric bills.
when a numeric designation serves quite well?
you can only teach monkey to use bigger stick, that does nott mean he know to create stuff from it
Take them: Zontar's "touched in the head": schizophrenic multiple personality disorder http://slashdot.org/comments.p... + manic depression http://slashdot.org/comments.p... now go take those meds, you whacko!
Did you try changing the thermal paste? (and maybe have some power management control to prevent it going above 2GHz..)
Nope, and nope. Hadn't thought of either--thanks for the suggestions. I'll try limiting the CPU first.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
I've lots (tens, maybe hundreds) of colleagues who buy Macs and put Linux on them.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
I'd mod you up if (a) I'd not already posted in this thread and (b) I could decide between Funny and Insightful. :)
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
That many there in the loonybin with you? http://slashdot.org/comments.p... + http://slashdot.org/comments.p...