Slashdot Mirror
Linus Torvalds: "GCC 4.9.0 Seems To Be Terminally Broken"
hypnosec (2231454) writes to point out a pointed critique from Linus Torvalds of GCC 4.9.0. after a random panic was discovered in a load balance function in Linux 3.16-rc6. in an email to the Linux kernel mailing list outlining two separate but possibly related bugs, Linus describes the compiler as "terminally broken," and worse ("pure and utter sh*t," only with no asterisk). A slice: "Lookie here, your compiler does some absolutely insane things with the
spilling, including spilling a *constant*. For chrissake, that
compiler shouldn't have been allowed to graduate from kindergarten.
We're talking "sloth that was dropped on the head as a baby" level
retardation levels here .... Anyway, this is not a kernel bug. This is your compiler creating
completely broken code. We may need to add a warning to make sure
nobody compiles with gcc-4.9.0, and the Debian people should probably
downgrate their shiny new compiler."
is going to be gunning for an apology...
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
It works better when they do nothing
From Torvalds, that's uncharacteristically friendly.
I'm a sloth and I thought it was funny.
Debian people should probably downgrate their shiny new compiler.
Or upgrade to llvm. Being above to compile with either gcc or llvm would be a nice option.
Debian people should probably downgrate their shiny new compiler.
Or upgrade to llvm. Being above to compile with either gcc or llvm would be a nice option.
That should have been "being able". One day I will have to start proofreading.
According to the actual bug report this problem seams to have started in 4.5. They only triggered it in 4.9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s...
4.8 was even worse.
That's hardly news.
Oh gosh a compiler bug! The world is going to end and GCC is terminally broken for ever and ever and ever. Life happens, and occasionally that includes compiler bugs. I've seen fewer bugs in GCC than any other production compiler ever.
Anyway, it seems like GCC is implementing a very obscure compiler option incorrectly in some circumstances which causes a crash.
But of course this is cue for lamentations of how awful and braindead GCC is and so much drama.
End result, the GCC people will fix this bug in short order (what are GCC point releases for anyway), and distributers will probably have a patch package out for 4.9.0 before 4.9.1 ships (what are distributors for anyway?) and the world will keep turning and GCC will go back from being the buggy broken braindead piece of shit to yet again being the most solid production compiler in existence.
It's a little ironic that the he's so quick to attack the GCC people. The success of Linux is 100% built off the success of GCC. There have been no other credible compilers for Linux throughout the majority of its existence and without GCC being bulletproof, Linux would never have been solid.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
He doesn't complain, he blows the fuck up.
I don't 'like' lima beans, that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with them. In this case your lima beans have been switched out with castor beans and you're dying. Pretty big difference.
Linus developed the linux kernel, and it's obviously very important to him. He didn't like the version control system that he was using so he invented a better one (GIT). Perhaps this will encourage him to create a better, less "retarded" compiler.
Can you explain what is the %rbp, and why are its offsets negative? If I set values 1, 2, 3, 4 to a bunch of variables, I get this assembly code:
movl $1, -4(%rbp)
movl $2, -8(%rbp)
movl $3, -12(%rbp)
movl $4, -16(%rbp)
If you want to say shit, say shit. We're all grown-ups here.
Circumcision is child abuse.
I don't 'like' lima beans, that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with them. In this case your lima beans have been switched out with castor beans and you're dying. Pretty big difference.
It's a compiler bug, for Pete's sake, not the end of the world.
.
Revert to a known working version of the compiler, submit a bug report and move on. Why the temper tantrums? What is with all the drama?
I keep wondering how Linux could become as good as it is, with a coordinator being a person like Torvalds. How many capable developers would put up with a boss like that in their day job? Yet they do working for Torvalds in their spare time...
These days I interpret Linus' "meltdowns" just as some funny nerd rage. He uses that technique to strongly underline the importance of his point, it's never real anger. Often there's a dash of humor in the mix, such as in this case the comment "that compiler shouldn't have been allowed to graduate from kindergarten".
^^^ Self-hating sloth ^^^
And every time he does ... he's right to do so.
A meltdown is when some candy ass can't deal with reality and blows up emotionally without provocation or justification.
When Linus blows up, he's pretty much always right and its pretty much always after the other guy(s) repeatedly denied being wrong or acted like an asshole who couldn't possibly be wrong.
When has anyone seen Linus blow up on someone who didn't actually deserve it?
GCC deserves to die.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Debian people should probably downgrate their shiny new compiler.
Or upgrade to llvm. Being [able] to compile with either gcc or llvm would be a nice option.
How could you _upgrade_ from GPLv3 to BSD? Sounds like the reverse.
Compiling with a BSD licensed compiler does not change the license of the software being compiled. Linux would remain gpl regardless of whether gcc or llvm is used.
... and they already fixed the bug two weeks ago, see the bug report
...the people who deserve the apology are the people who were subject to an abusive tirade.
You can point out someone made a mistake. There's no obligation to be "nice" when doing so. There is an obligation to not be abusive, which is what Linus repeatedly does. Abuse includes mockery, ridicule, name calling, etc.
He's being a bully, pure and simple - using his popularity to shove around others. That should not be tolerated, full stop.
Please help metamoderate.
On my machine, I have clang 3.4.2-r100, gcc 4.9.0, 4.8.3, 4.7.4, 4.6.4 and icc 14.0.3.174 installed. All simultaneously, no hassle.
Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
So he actually called it, "pure and utter sht"?
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
is going to be gunning for an apology...
Maybe, but it take a while for them to get worked up enough to do anything...
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
I don't believe it, reddit is full of grammarian twits.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
The main problem is that Linus did not take copyright assignments, so it's practially impossible now to relicense the Linux kernel or upgrade it to GPLv3. Therefore, always remember to use "GPLv3 or later" when you release software. The "or later" is really important.
No, Linus did the right thing. "Or later" is very dangerous, its a blank check, its an unknown, ... its a trap! We have no idea what some future GPL license may include. It may include things that we do not want. As some developers who are staying with gpl 2 intentionally have said about gpl 3.
That said, the above is off topic. Compiling the kernel with llvm does not change the license of the kernel. A BSD licensed compiler has no effect on GPL licensed source code. The resulting binary derives its license from its source, not the compiler used.
in the ginned-up outrage over the mis-typed code.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Debian people should probably downgrate their shiny new compiler.
Or upgrade to llvm. Being above to compile with either gcc or llvm would be a nice option.
"Update to to icc", that I would understand (for Intel platforms). "Upgrade to LLVM" sounds like this is not coming from a C++ programmer who really cares about the final binary (yes, GCC still produces better binaries is most situations). And given the issue at hand, it seems you're under the delusion that LLVM is bug-free and doesn't miscompile stuff. Yes, LLVM gives prettier error messages. Yes, LLVM code-base is module. Yes, Apple fan boys love it. Yes, it's BSD licensed and plays along nice with people who don't really care about software freedom. Nothing I care about here. But, LLVM codebase is as bug-ridden as GCC or any other codebase, don't pretend otherwise.
You seem to be making the implication that it's not okay for Linus to loudly complain about a compiler that produces a broken Linux kernel. Why is that?
Write failed: Broken pipe
Strawman argument. Nobody except you has posited that "all opinions are valid", and nobody suggested that criticisms can't be made. You invented that position to attack it.
I specifically said: it's fine to tell people they did something wrong. What you may not do is be abusive.
Actually, I can be abusive if I choose to be. It may not win me many friends and it may alienate the ones I do have, but I can certainly do so if I want.
Whether or not Linus advances Linux because of, or in spite of, being abusive is an open question.
As Louis Brandeis (and correctly, IMHO) pointed out, "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the process of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
Clearly you are not looking in the right places.
Yeah, let's pretend that 80+% of the world isn't using Android, not to mention supercomputers or huge server deployments. What you're missing is not everyone is using an IBM compatible PC and play games whole day in their mom's basement.
These days I interpret Linus' "meltdowns" just as some funny nerd rage. He uses that technique to strongly underline the importance of his point, it's never real anger. ....
It is bullying, plain and simple.
Don't worry. The first humans to migrate to North America quickly drove the giant sloths extinct. The remaining sloths are small and harmless.
That was a Goonies reference you dimwit
I've been finding compiler bugs in the last several major releases of GCC, going back about two years now. I've seen a couple of projects simply stop working under new versions of GCC when older GCC versions (and Clang) compile code that runs beautifully. Iv'e brought this up a few times with developers and compiler folks and they all seem to shrug it off. This is why I use Clang almost exclusively these days, GCC is a broken mess.
Nice concern troll.
Linus is quite lenient compared to the leadership at microsoft or apple. The latter are more interested in appearance than they are in technical excellence because appearance is all that matters when appealing to their non-tech customers. The problems lie where these products must be maintained by technical people for the non technical customer who is usually their boss.
If you can make a good case for your position/code, linus will listen to you.. If you're full of shit or crying like a bitch because he wont' accept shitty code, then he'll tear you apart. At apple or microsoft, you can be fired for losing a political battle even when being correct. I'd rather work for linus.
Well, you got one and only one thing right. You truly are sorry :-)
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Considering how particular the man is about programming languages, he failed if it was a reference because Sloth was the guy's name (Note: capitalization).
...
They're too slow for that...
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Well, if you RTFP, Linus is abusing the *compiler*'s behavior. At no point does he abuse the compiler authors.
No TRUE Slothman would think that funny, laddie!
(Might as well get the logical fallacies out of the way early...)
Internalized specieism, you can't even see how the system oppresses you, we're taking away your agency until you can see the truth (ie agree with us)
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hl...
Precisely that...it's a compiler bug. People get real tired of "is it my code, or something else" when things go boom after they hit late 20s...To put things in perspective, if Microsoft shipped a VS update that banjaxxed the C++ compiler under certain conditions (well, more often than it probably already does), developers! developers! developers! everywhere would be looking to BBQ someone alive for that mistake. Yes, mistakes happen. Yes, it's a part of technology. But with unit tests and all this other overhead that programmers are forced to write, these problems are supposed to be disappearing. You're not supposed to suddenly be encountering the equivalent of fairies in your garden. So I have sympathy for the man, and those who have to put of with this stuff. This is a problem that should have been caught long before it made its way to him, and the time he spent trying to figure out whether or not it was his code, his compiler settings, some missed update or flag, possibly a vanilla install, etc. before bringing in even more people to do the same and cover all his bases before screaming at the top of his lungs must have been at least several hours of his time, possibly a few days or a week.
I don't understand it anymore. How are we not beyond the need to replace random letters with asterix? I mean honestly, the summary goes on to comment about it. It's a waste of space. Just fucking say it already.
You mean when Tridgdell violated the EULA and illegally accessed the Bitkeeper service with the intent to reverse engineer, when Linus said not to? Tridgdell claims to have done it to help the Linux project by gaining access to meta data not available to the free version of the client, but Linus agreed to the EULA and had access to this information already. Because of Tridgdell's actions, Linus had a large mess to clean up.
Of the winners in computing, those that won because of technical merit are swarmed by those that won for other reasons.
I mean just look at some of the match ups
DOS vs Everything else available ?
Windows vs Everything else
Microsoft office vs Everything else
X86 vs Everything else
ISA bus vs NuBus vs MCA
DirectX vs OpenGL
Technical merit only seems to matter when it completely crushes every other factor as in transistor vs tube, IC vs transistor, CMOS vs TTL.
Why would anyone use a new gcc release three months old for critical components?
When lenity and cruelty play for a kingdom The gentler gamester is the soonest winner
Your argument applies to itself. You are accusing people of abdicating judgment: your solution is to not judge Linus! Furthermore, you are confusing criticism of the messenger with criticism of the message; as SuperBanana points out, this is a straw man argument.
Not all opinions are valid and equal: nor are all means of expressing them. We have the right to speak freely; we also have the right to judge such speech as invalid or unacceptable. I suggest this right to judge is in fact an obligation. Silence implies consent. Abusive behavior should be called out. You may argue that Linus was not abusive, but to argue that we should never make such judgments in the first place is to fall prey to the false equivalence you decry.
GCC is open source. If Linus is such a great expert on the issues with it then why isn't he fixing them? Probably because he doesn't have the skills.
You can't just go and fix every program, even if they are open source. It takes a lot of time to familiarize one with the code base. That is probably limiting Linus here too. His bug report is very precise, and that will greatly ease the job of the GCC developer who actually fixes the bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s...
GCC 4.5.0 was released in April 2010, so I wonder how many kernel oops it has caused.
Linus has been a user of these tools for decades now. He's one of a select few who have the capability, experience, and understanding necessary to even approach the depth of the bug that they're talking about. He's one of the few who have been heavily relying on them for his entire technology career.
What I'm saying is that Linus knows his tools. He knows when his tools are need in of repair. He knows what to expect from them and by this point should have a solid understanding of their quirks.
Sometimes tools don't work how they're supposed to.
I'm inclined to believe the master woodworker when he tells me his blade is dull and needs to be sharpened.
I'm inclined to believe the master programmer when he tells me the new version of his compiler is generating incorrect code.
I'm probably a below average programmer myself, but I've hit enough depth to understand some of the context of this issue. I read through a bit and see them doing the footwork necessary to deal with the issue. That's something I don't see people doing when they're blowing smoke and being bitchy.
Linus has a bit of an attitude problem. But so does almost everyone else in a position like his, where he is the project leader for something incredibly complex. Like the local event equipment guy who can be a real ass when he's in action, but knows exactly what he is doing, how to do it, why he does it how he does it, how to explain it to his workers, and gets it done on schedule, because he's been doing it for a very long time and lives and breathes the job.
This is all beside the point, which is that you could only write your post because I previously slept with your mother.
Barack Obama's *policies* are terrible and should go back to Africa! Barack Obama's *policies* are the Antichrist. Hey don't look at me like that. I'm abusing the thing, not the person. Just like Linus. The *compiler* never graduated kindergarten.
Try fixing a bug in an OSS project sometimes, if you haven't. It can take ages to familiarize yourself with the project to be able to pinpoint the problem.
And what's your great creation oh Anonymous one? Despite your mindless drivel few doubt Linus Torvalds' ability. Some do disagree with his methods and attitude. Just because you lack the intelligence to understand his accomplishments doesn't diminish them.
I think the invective is meant to motivate the developer but some people don't respond well to nastiness.
GCC had a bug that wasn't covered by their unittests.
Linux had a bug that wasn't covered by their unittests
According to Linus, only one of these two is retarded, can you guess which?
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
If only there were a dedicated community for every sad sloth, or at least an anagram thereof.
(If you either feel for the sloths, or just appreciate the pun, please send a random amount of slothcoins to SML12GaoebyneT7ctYuj9PFicptetjPUct. Thank you.)
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
What exactly does 'abusive' mean when a european kernel crafter is accusing a 'free speech' american compiler crafter that his compiler is utter shit?
Either the compiler is 'utter shit' and the accusation is a fact and proclaiming so is free speech or it is not, then it might be considered 'abusive'.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Yeah, that can be a slight problem... :)
This is probably a bad example because the end result was the invention of Git, and so you'd have a hard time these days convincing people that Tridgdell's actions had a bad outcome.
I'm super tired of this BS argument. I'm sick and tired of high performing professional being criticized for expecting high standards from others. Not every job requires or should have an abstraction layer of "people development," "life coaching," or professional courtesy and pleasantries. Some jobs, the jobs that truly change of course of human events requires breathtaking sacrifice, most significantly of all, putting aside ones ego when called out. If someone calls me an idiot for being wrong, whether justified or not, I'm still wrong and I accept it. If my performance is so shoddy that I get called out as incompetent, than an introspective person should have the maturity to realize that he or she caused such frustration to the other person that such words were uttered. To be able to take this is the sign of a true professional and leader. If you can't take the heat, just GTFO of the way, and go work at a Fortune 500 with regular white collar people with thin skin.
... on second thought, maybe her outrage (see her up against paparazzi) is just what Linus needs.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Way to respond (1) is a strawman argument. No insight there. Read the original post:
http://lkml.iu.edu//hypermail/linux/kernel/1407.3/00650.html
Does Linus call anybody names or wish their children ill will? No.
Does the original poster make a compilation of phrases, subtracting all of the technical content? Absolutely.
So stick to the context of what he actually said and make a legitimate criticism.
" How could a stupid cunt like you even bother posting such a moronic comment? Seriously, go die in a fire and I hope your kids get leukemia. Only someone with severe autism and Down's syndrome would be so clueless about psychology."
But Linus, despite the vulgarity of some of his rants, doesn't use language like that. Unless you can provide a link to prove otherwise, Linus hasn't used terms that poke fun at people with disabilities ("autism") or used sexist language ("cunt"). He does use generic terms of abuse like shit and fuck, which doesn't really qualify as sexist since it can both men and women (and homosexuals) fuck.
You position holds true when dealing with a small child.
If some smears his own feces on a wall and they are:
- 2 years old; you scold them gently and clean them up first, then the wall.
- 20 years old; yeah... not so much. If a little abuse is all you get you're probably lucky.
You've asserted several times that people may not be abusive, and other people have run with some kind of silly argument that Linus isn't, but neither your assertion nor their tangent makes you right.
If you can't see why he is 100% right to be outraged at all the time wasted and all the problems caused by the sloth it takes to make this kind of incompetent mistake, just accept the fact that as a software developer you'd make a great janitor and change careers.
You're equating personality with skill. I can behave like an asshole while being completely incompetent, or I can behave like a nice person while being competent, or anything in-between. Aggressiveness and competency are orthogonal.
Why on earth do you think you have any right to tell him how he should conduct himself?
Linus is right, GCC is braindead. Its code is purposely opaque and has huge maintenance problems. This is not the first time GCC is the source of suffering. I remember the bug in 2.95 causing all sorts of grief.
It would be interesting if the kernel devs switched to clang like FreeBSD has done. Even just the threat of doing so could give at least a good rivalry and competition usually means the one who improves the fastest will survive.
I, personally, dislike swearing even when "sanitized".
OTOH, I do realize that this is my personal taste. I feel it makes the communication less clear.
OTTH, written communication lacks the richness of communication by speech. This means that there is no inherent channel corresponding to tone of voice. When someone uses swearing as a substitute for certain tones of speech, it's really hard to say there is a better option. The alternative work-arounds tend to be verbose. Also, swearing via the use of the term "shit" appears to be something we inherited from our common ancestor with chimpanzees, because if they are taught to sign they will automatically use the term "shit" to describe persons and situations that they dislike.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
If he hadn't pinpointed the problem, how would he know that gcc was to blame in the first place?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Yes. That's the one I mean.
Linus's decision to go with a proprietary solution for such a central free software project was wrong to begin with. Linus took a huge presumption, agreeing to a EULA on behalf of the entire community. As such, it was Linus's own mess he had to clean up. I think the passage of time only shows that more clearly.
Shachar
Yes, but pinpointing the problem in GCC source code is another story.
1. The Linux community has been elitist and abusive since it began. Why is Linus's "tirade" anything new, unexpected, or outside the norm of the community that has taken pride in its arrogance and mean, nasty treatment of anyone daring to ask a legitimate question about something related to Linux and its underpinnings?
2. Words exist for a reason, even the "abusive" ones. They convey meaning that cannot be properly conveyed by using other words; it's why they're in our lexicon to begin with! If you have to sugar coat things and dance around the issue then you are only beleaguring a point. Having said that do I believe that Linus was NOT out of bounds in this case ... YES!
3. I think there was a comment above that said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." I don't think anyone that does development work hasn't had a tirade like that, unless they're über pious or something. It's easy to armchair quarterback and snipe from the bushes on the Internet where no one knows your own prior workplace behavior for reference. Don't throw asteroids when you're standing in a glass cathedral! This is aimed at you SuperBanana...
The resulting binary derives its license from its source, not the compiler used.
Until you build something that doesn't allow you to license the runtime libraries without bringing the entire executable under the same license.
That's not the compiler, and that doesn't happen with bsd licensed tools/libs.
Let's try an offline example
To welder: That joint is unacceptable.
Welder: laughs - just sign it off loser.
The situation then does not resolve until someone has the guts to try another approach.
Approach 2
To welder: Your weld is fucked. I can stick a fucking ruler 50mm into this enormous fucking crack here.
Welder now gets that the situation is being seen as serious and can not just be fobbed off.
Sometimes you just get ignored if you do not use appropriate language to convey how serious a situation is.
Let's see:
(1) Microsoft had one guy who dumped on people by calling them "random" (kind of a great insult, actually) and another guy who threw chairs. Dipstick score: 2 Results: tops in their industry.
(2) Apple has a massive "motivator", spelled a-s-s-h-o-l-e, tolerating zero garbage and pushing coders harder than Cleopatra pushed rowers. Dipstick score: 1 Results: biggest and most profitable company, period.
(3) Linux exists at all, despite being given away for free, decades after it was introduced. It is ubiquitous, runs on mainframes and thimbles, and more cell phones than iOS. Chief penguinisto occasionally says "This crap tastes like crap." Dipstick score: 0 Results: most improbably popular free code ever.
Seems like 2014 just might have been the year of Linux on the desktop if Linus had taken some chair-throwing, and stock-option-hoarding lessons from his peers.
Since it meant that Linus had to go and spend time writing git after bitkeeper was taken away from him due to that licence violation he had a very good reason to be angry.
Do you think the GPL is the only licence that should be respected?
I'm a sloth and I'm too lazy to demand an apology.
Actually, "in the engineering room" he sang a different tune: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s...
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Does it matter? What matters is that Tridge fucked around and violated the licence and the fallout hit Linus in the form of having to do a lot of unnecessary work. Being only human this appeared to have made him angry.
Try reading the above post entire instead of key words then. It's only three lines long. I can wait.
If you use software it's only fair to stick to the licence the creator wished you to use - if you don't like it use something else.
If someone violates the terms of your licence of course you can.
People only need to look at your post history to see more often than not you don't know what your talking about, and you're certainly not in any position to admonish others.
If Linus does have a point, he can make it professionally instead of ranting like a scorned child. If he isn't capable that, than he isn't qualified to lead.
If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
I'm a laddie and I find your post offensive!
[The Universe] has gone offline.
I did mostly linux kernel stuff for over a decade. The vast majority of developers are quite helpful to people with little history in the community. As others have pointed out, generally this sort of stuff is aimed at people/projects that have a history of good work and then fall short of expectations.
If you submit a patch (formatted as per instructions) to the list, generally it will either get ignored (in which case you might want to contact the maintainer for that area) or else you will get some comments. Note that not eveyone's comments count equally--ultimately the subsystem maintainer is the one that will apply the change.
He said multiple things. /sh*t/ matches sht, shht, shhht, shhhht, shhhhhhhhhhhhhhht
and an infinity of variants on the theme.
No cussing here.
The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
I wouldn't call "It's somewhere inside this multi-million line code base" as pinpointing the problem. :)
I would be very pleased if the people posting 3 line articles to slashdot would take the time to follow the thread on the mailing list long enough to understand what its all about. It's informative and you learn something about the world.
Beforehand i did not knwo about the red zone, and it sounds like something which i would like to turn off by default, but i more or less understand it's meaning in optimizing the performance of an ABI.
If you follow the thread, it deems only to happen an specific optimization settings Everybody knows that at high optimization settings the assembly output of you compiler may differ significantly from how it looked before, should look, is expected to look like, or even is specified to look like.
I hope that they isolated a test case from this issue.
I hope that more conservative distros compile the kernel using more conservative settings and more conservative compilers.
Seriously, the GCC is a prestige project just like the kernel. You have to have the basics of your particular software development field down, otherwise you have no business whatsoever lost in these projects. I don't know the details and I certainly can't judge them, but from the broad perspective it seems like somebody did something akin to not avalidating and filtering your input or pushing windows-1252 but presenting it as UTF-8 or something in webdevelopment and it passed all the way through evaluation, testing, merging, release management, etc. right into the final GCC release. Which does reflect on to the entire team and project.
Bottom line: When Linus has released rants like these in the past he usually was spot on and dead right. The GCC has gotten some flak for it's shittyness lately, and it looks like they haven't improved their process much yet.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
If I have a consistent set of conditions that set off the fault, it usually takes me a couple hours to make a fix. Usually it's only some small oss project though, the more popular ones tend to have their stuff a little better in order.
No. I'm saying that outrage is something a competent person would experience, and "What's the big deal; why are you being mean?" is something a, shall we say, less than competent person would think. If you really think he was being "abusive" than you literally have noconcept of truly abusive behavior.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Great tactic. There's only one problem. It is not actually possible to look at someone's post history*, which is clearly what you are counting on. I can assure you I am proved correct multiple times on a daily basis. I am also wrong from time to time, naturally. The next time you want to try and prove me wrong, go for it. I look forward to it.
* Looking at the last 25 posts does not equate to looking at ones post history. The "history" will change between now and noon.
For extra laughs, random post I looked at from your comments page. ROTFLMAO
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
It was never brought to court, but the very real reality is that he accessed a server and explicitly accessed a server after being told not to with the intention of committing a very likely copyright infringement, all in the "name" of Linux. Linus was not happy with this.
The end does not justify the means.
Also, was causing the creation of Git some kind of grand scheme by Tridgdell? If it was an accident, he shouldn't get credit for it.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Perhaps, but I'm less convinced of the orthogonality of aggressiveness and managing the contributions of geeks with large egos.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Indeed.
GPLv666: Stallman is dead and all your code now belongs to Microsoft.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Perhaps, but I'm less convinced of the orthogonality of aggressiveness and managing the contributions of geeks with large egos.
Many corporations are governed by aggressive managers. For some reason people equate assertiveness and competence - it probably has to do with some part of our brain we share in common with wolves. Many have argued that this sort of thing is what causes many established companies to fail.
There is an article on /. every few months, about how Linus Torvalds was abrasively to-the-point about something, or about how a kernel developer responded to a Linus abrasive episode with a "dude, not helpful, be nice..." reasoned argument.
From my recollection, Torvalds does not often get involved beyond the initial message, but when he does I seem to recall that his response is "My sand pit, my rules. You don't like it, go make your own."
While the GCC compiler may not be a part of his Linux sand pit, it does go a long way toward defining the quality of the executable it produces, so even if the code is perfect a shit compiler will still produce a shit executable, in the same way that a perfect compiler will produce a shit executable from shit code. The difference is that a shit compiler cannot produce a good executable, whereas the shit code can be improved to good code with time and effort, and if a coder whose executable ends up being shit tries to turn around and blame the compiler, everyone else is going to respond with "bad workman always blames his tools, therefore the code is shit".
99 times out of 100, the code is shit, because generally the compiler devs are much better coders [citation needed] than the rest of us mortals, so we probably assume that executable errors are introduced in our code (or is it just that I am a crap programmer??).
You're at the club and some jackass compiler spills variables all over your girlfriend? Of course you're gonna be an asshole and get in their face. It doesn't matter how many optimizations he has turned on.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Some how, your boss can compare your job to a baby with retardation issues, but hey!! It gets the work done and thats the most important part!! and is Linus, he always talk like that which is ok; and the most important part is that he is talking about the job and not you or the group who did it, and that is a huuuuuge difference in that.
Internet tough guy who is anonymous.
Just google site:slashdot.org "Zero__Kelvin (151819)".
Oh, I'm sorry, let me translate... "Don't you know how to motherfucking google, pinhead?" Was that correct? Does it need more fucks? Should I use "moron" instead? My Tough Nerd is a bit rusty.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
You obviously didn't actually try that, or you would know that it doesn't work. Idiot.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Actually, I can be abusive if I choose to be.
No you cannot. We have extensive laws against it.
How's this? Fuck you. You gonna arrest me now?
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
No you can't, because the existence of abuse is dependant on the perceptions of person who believes they have been abused. It is not possible to abuse a rational person, you are simply correct or incorrect in your claims and they way you package the data is just a question of efficiency.
So has Linus made and incorrect claim and or done so inefficiently? I'd say no, the message was accurate, clear and memorable.
If people feel that Linus is being abusive they are in the wrong industry, or they can go and write their own OS, cuddlinix.
An excellent point, which fits nicely with the claim that the remedy is more speech, not censorship. And "Political Correctness" is a framework for cultural censorship.
That's not to say that I think courtesy and politeness are passe. Quite the contrary, in fact. However, Linus has continued to speak plainly, does not suffer fools gladly, and generally embeds (at least IME) his sharp (and often salty) comments in a matrix of humor and good sense.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
Ah, the old may/may not can/can not confusion.
In case you didn't notice, you didn't reply to what the GP said. You replied to a twisted version of it. A straw man version of it, one might even say.
Your complaint about my word choice is wrong too. Strawman indeed.
Please carry on and don't take anything I wrote here as an admonition to cease expressing yourself. I would recommend that you give a little more thought to the things you say, folks might take you a bit more seriously if you did.
Justice Brandeis was and is correct that "... the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
Ah, the old may/may not can/can not confusion.
In case you didn't notice, you didn't reply to what the GP said. You replied to a twisted version of it. A straw man version of it, one might even say.
What is more, I replied to SuperBanana's assertion that:
Where exactly did I twist things in my response? How is my response a straw man? Perhaps I'm just a bit slow, but I don't get it.
N.B. This is more rope for you. Please, by all means, take it.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
Ah yes, the Intel compiler. Wasn't that also known as the compiler that "cripplied" performance for many AMD systems, by ignoring capabilities flags and instead looking for a "GenuineIntel" processor...
Yeah, that sounds like a great alternative to GCC.
See also many other links. I'll stick with GCC, thanks. At least the GCC team doesn't have a vested interest in f***ing over other hardware vendors.
Then I'm sure you won't mind when I call you an idiot, because the question is obviously if being abusive is morally correct and helpful. No one's saying you *can't* act like a jerk, they're saying you shouldn't, especially when holding a respected position.
Please. Speak your mind. If you don't like what I say, say something about it.
I would point out that context is an important part of any communication. I emphatically did not say that I think being verbally obnoxious, abusive, or as you put it, act like a jerk was a good idea, nor did I advocate it.
My point, since you obviously didn't get it the first time, was that if you limit one person's expression (whether that be via law, custom, culture or social pressure), you diminish us all, and set a dangerous precedent.
What is more, your morality is not my morality. Nor is it anyone else's. Morality is our behavior based on the moral choices each of us makes when confronted with a moral choice. That is not a group activity. Each individual must make their own moral choices and be willing to accept responsibility for the actions they take based on their individual moral choices.
I specifically noted that it is an open question as to whether Linus Torvalds' speech is helpful or not. But it's not my place (nor is it yours or the GP's) to attempt to restrict Mr. Torvalds' freedom of expression. If you don't like what he says, say so. Even better, explain why you don't like it. Perhaps you'll convince him.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
Yes, you can be abusive, in the sense that you have the ability to be abusive. It is wrong to be abusive.
"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the process of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."
Yup! More logic and arguments, not abuse.
Actually, given that a KERNEL was being compiled improperly -- a truly VITAL piece of software on which LIVES may depend -- I think he actually did pretty good in that he managed to keep his anger directed squarely at the COMPILER, instead of actually getting abusive with the PEOPLE. Notice that all his "stupid"s and "retarded"s were directed against the compiler! So he wasn't actually abusing any people, rather the poor, poor compiler, which of course has no feelings or human spirit of any sort, being just a pile of digital information on a computer :)
If they're 20 years old or older they probably have some kind of mental disorder (or intellectual disability or developmental disability), in which case compassion and getting them proper care for that are the best responses. Or, if they're older, they may be a senior in a nursing home with some kind of dementing disease. In which case they'll probably be already getting care. Or they're having their mind ravaged in prison by a solitary confinement unit and so being made worse by it, in which case $@#! the abusive prison system. Or their parents totally failed at raising them, in which case the anger should go toward the parents, not the victim of the negligence.
If something "more" than just abuse would include physical violence, then that's criminal and "two wrongs do not make a right".
No better time to dump on a project than when it receives an award of academic recognition, lol: http://rhelblog.redhat.com/201...
You have a couple of entertaining alternatives to just "they're a dick", but it's a reach to say you're covering all cases and as such abuse is never an appropriate response.
As for the "anger towards the parents", if someone assaults me I should go and piss on their ancestor's grave? Exactly how far back do you take the parental responsibility?
"more" could easily include any number of legal remedies, like getting the cops to beat them up, assuming they're not a mentally disabled octogenarian on the loose from prison.
Ok, parent comment was quite certainly intended as second degree, possibly bait even. Still, it raises a point.
From anyone else's viewpoint, you are [perceived as] all that you do. People perceive you through your code... and through your attitude about your code... and through your attitude about your attitude... and so on.
But that's how they perceive you, not necessarily how they evaluate you.
Now, it is quite understandable to be affected by others' opinion of your code, there's no question about this: that's your work, and people usually do something with the intent that it be well done, so criticism can of course be resented as it points at a failure, and we are taught that failure is bad (which is a mistaken approach IMO, and possibly the reason why many people mistake their own worth with the immediate, first degree, worth of what they do).
You should make the difference between a criticism of the result of one of your actions and a criticism of your own person (or even a criticism of the way you do things). Heck, if there was no difference, no one on Earth would love, or even like, anyone else, since that would require loving, or at least liking, absolutely everything (s)he does [of course, I am assuming here that most people on Earth actually do like, or even love, someone else; that could be a misperception on my part].
The difference is that you cannot undo an action of yours, but you can change the way you do things, thus affecting your future actions, and even your future reaction to things, including, yes, criticisms. In coderspeak, this could be expressed as "agile development of your own self". :)
Long point short: you are not what you code, you are a coder. Keep this difference in mind.
No, you're generally proved incorrect and are just too arrogant to realize it.
Your post history is available at http://slashdot.org/~Zero__Kelvin, FYI.
And yes, that is post history, and no, it isn't limited to your last 25 posts.
Here you can see your posts 10 pages in : http://slashdot.org/users2.pl?page=10&uid=151819&view=userhomepage&fhfilter=%22home%3AZero__Kelvin%22
And that argument with Xest? Idiot armchair lawyer didn't understand the law as much as he thought he did. I showed him to be wrong, but he just couldn't listen.
Ahh, I love arrogant IT people who can't admit when they're wrong. It's just so amusing.
If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
In my experience, harsh language is best tempered (and employed) by someone who uses it to judge the situation and provide correction, in such a manner as to insure it doesn't happen again. The language used gets as personal as it needs to, and no further. Ideally, no personal attacks would be used, just a critique of the work. And if that person who employed it happened to be in the wrong, they apologize. Does Linus acknowledge his own mistakes? And, if Linus goes over the line, does he acknowledge and apologize for it? If he does, then he'd be someone I'd want to work for--because I know that the occasional negative reinforcement would be beneficial and it's not personal. From what I understand, Steve Jobs was that way at Apple: a giant asshole, but capable of admitting when he was wrong, and backing his team to the fullest.
Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
Yes, that's right. Words don't mean anything.
Congratulations on finally having something to add in a Slashdot thread!
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
If it's in the licence you are stuck with it - GPL or anything else.
Some people have argued that that the GPL is unreasonable because it insists you shouldn't just cut and paste the code, put your own name on it, and then use it in a closed source project. Whether you feel entitled to other people's stuff or not the price of admission is sticking to whatever terms the code is licenced under, whether that is not being allowed to rip off the code and call it yours or in the other case not allowed to reverse engineer the application. Whether it's not against the law is irrelevant - it's like "no shoes no service", the vendor gets to cut off service if you break their terms of service even if you are not breaking the law.
I replied to someone who said that "his manner is coarse." They were speaking of Linus's general manner, not his specific conduct in this particular case. Linus has a long history of name-calling, mocking, ridiculing, etc. So no, I have not "just learned to read recently" (hello, abuse.) You, apparently, are unaware of something called "context"
Please help metamoderate.
Even god almighty couldn't make Italian transit work, Mussolini never stood a chance.
The italians couldn't even manage to invade greece once the war started. Hitler had to send troops to help out and they ended up doing most of the work (no joke). Anecdotes say he was fuming, that with allies like Italy no one needed enemies. As WW2 goes, The Third Reich would've probably actually errm ... 'done better' (pardon my choice of words) without Italy as an ally. :-)
If you want a project to fail, give it to italians, I guess.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Imbecile. Check your arrogance and you will realize this is far from the first time you've been wrong, and that you could have been learning things all the while.
If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
Yes, but want to bet that the bug ONLY happens with gcc 4.9 is compiled with gcc 4.9?
The end does not justify the means.
If you were going to go that route, you shouldn't have lead off by arguing from consequences to begin with.
I'm a laddie and I find your post offensive, you insensitive clod!
FTFY.
I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.