Linus Torvalds Officially Announces the Release of Linux Kernel 4.8 (softpedia.com)

Slashdot reader prisoninmate brings news from Softpedia: Today, Linus Torvalds proudly announced the release and availability for download of the Linux 4.8 kernel branch, which is now the latest stable and most advanced one. Linux kernel 4.8 has been in development for the past two months, during which it received no less than eight Release Candidate testing versions that early adopters were able to compile and install on their GNU/Linux operating system to test various hardware components or simply report bugs...

A lot of things have been fixed since last week's RC8 milestone, among which we can mention lots of updated drivers, in particular for GPU, networking, and Non-Volatile Dual In-line Memory Module (NVDIMM), a bunch of improvements to the ARM, MIPS, SPARC, and x86 hardware architectures, updates to the networking stack, as well as to a few filesystem, and some minor changes to cgroup and vm.
The kernel now supports the Raspberry Pi 3 SoC as well as the Microsoft Surface 3 touchscreen.

Comments

Well that's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm still using 2.6.32-642.4.2 and it works eminently well for me. Plus, no systemd.

Re:Well that's nice

[arth1]

I'm still using 2.6.32-642.4.2 and it works eminently well for me. Plus, no systemd.

No need to stay at old kernels to get the benefit of no systemd.

# uname -a
Linux hastur 4.4.21-gentoo #1 SMP Thu Sep 29 15:31:21 EDT 2016 x86_64 Intel Xeon E312xx (Sandy Bridge) GenuineIntel GNU/Linux
# ps -fp 1
UID PID PPID C STIME TTY TIME CMD
root 1 0 0 Sep29 ? 00:00:02 init [3]

Re:Well that's nice

[epyT-R]

4.8 doesn't require systemd either..

Re:Well that's nice

[epyT-R]

sorry, also meant to add that old kernels don't require systemd either.

Re:Well that's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds a bit backward, the services provided by the kernel are required by systemd not the other way round. Most of the compelling features of systemd are in fact kernel provided services that systemd put a limited api in front of. Take those away and systemd is very yawn worthy.

Re:Well that's nice

[epyT-R]

arth's point was that the kernel, new or old, doesn't require systemd.

Re:Well that's nice

[maestroX]

I'm running stampede 2.0.32 and it still works on my 0xF00F, almost as smooth back when it was the year of the Linux Desktop.

No more first posts since ages though and swap partition envelopes nearly the disk nowadays when starting Firefox.

Re:Well that's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

arth's point was that the kernel, new or old, doesn't require systemd.

What about the ones of a moderate age, neither new nor old?

Re: Well that's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Not yet, but I'm sure Lennard will correct that in due course.

Re: Well that's nice

[arth1]

Not yet, but I'm sure Lennard will correct that in due course.

One of the systemd developers tried to make changes to the kernel for systemd only, breaking other software in the process, and was politely told where to stuff it.

Re:Well that's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

I preferred the Linux kernel when its versioning was not driven by a marketingseque scheme. Between SystemD, dropping support of older hardware - why when almost everything can be a module? - and this version grinding it is disheartening. I was a relatively early adopter of GNU/Linux in 1992 when it was primarily a command-line-driven user interface.

Linus if you feel compelled to make changes maybe try redesigning the kernel to a micro-kernel. These days any perceived advantages of a monolithic kernel are addressed by CPUs whose speed we could not even fathom when you began this epic adventure with "nothing commercial, just a hobby" operating system used by millions of people or organisations around the world. A grateful GNU/Linux user on a personal and professional level.

Re:Well that's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Linus if you feel compelled to make changes maybe try redesigning the kernel to a micro-kernel.

The other major GNU kernel already has that covered.

Re: Well that's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

And its a lot more than phones and PC's that run Linux.... And microkernels do have their drawbacks too.... If you want to keep the old legacy support then offer yourself as a maintainer...

Re:Well that's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

# ps -fp 1
UID PID PPID C STIME TTY TIME CMD
root 1 0 0 Sep29 ? 00:00:02 init [3]

# ps -fp 1
UID PID PPID C STIME TTY TIME CMD
root 1 0 0 sept.26 ? 00:00:08 /sbin/init

but

# ls -l /sbin/init
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 20 sept. 20 15:03 /sbin/init -> /lib/systemd/systemd

Re:Well that's nice

[arth1]

You can tell the system with sysvinit apart by the runlevel being shown, in this case [3].

(And that telinit is actually working, so you can change runlevels at will or have init reload, without having to reboot, like with upstart or systemd.)

Re:Well that's nice

[Rutulian]

Of course you can change targets ("runlevels") with systemd without rebooting. If you use Fedora, they have even preserved the telinit command and made equivalent "runlevel" targets, to make it easy for people coming from a sysvinit background.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki...

Re:Well that's nice

[arth1]

If you use Fedora, they have even preserved the telinit command and made equivalent "runlevel" targets, to make it easy for people coming from a sysvinit background.

So if I update any of the libraries that init uses, all I have to do is a "telinit q"? Last I checked, that was broken in upstart, and missing in systemd.

And systemd now lets me drop to single user mode? That's an improvement. Last I heard was that the systemd perps claimed that you didn't need single user mode nor read-only, evidence to the contrary (like growing raids or single-stepping through commands with nothing running except what was manually started) being archaic and not needed on modern systems...

Re:Well that's nice

[Rutulian]

So if I update any of the libraries that init uses, all I have to do is a "telinit q"?

systemctl daemon-reexec

That one isn't mapped to a telinit equivalent (I don't think).

Last I checked, that was broken in upstart

Lots of things were broken in upstart. Systemd is a tremendous improvement over upstart, much to the chagrin of Mark Shuttleworth.

And systemd now lets me drop to single user mode? That's an improvement.

That's been there, for a while. I'm not sure who these "perps" are that you speak of, but systemd will do anything you tell it to. If you want a single user mode, define a target that creates a single user mode, just like you would define runlevel 1 to not start multiple ttys. I didn't follow every development of systemd as it was happening, and only really jumped in when it came (officially) to Red Hat 7.2 and then Ubuntu 16.04. While there are some lingering integration issues still (mostly with specific daemons), I would say it works pretty well, and the distro maintainers have done a lot good work with backwards-compatibility scripts to help people transition from sysvinit. So yes, there is a rescue.target, which is also called runlevel1.target on both Fedora and Debian.

Re: Well that's nice

[lsatenstein]

Not yet, but I'm sure Lennard will correct that in due course.

One of the systemd developers tried to make changes to the kernel for systemd only, breaking other software in the process, and was politely told where to stuff it.

Yes, systemd in 2014 was flakey, just as pulseaudio was back in it's time. But it is doing well today, healthy, and meeting expectations.

Re: Well that's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

All it took was Linus himself shitting on the parts of systemd that were incompatible with the GODDAMNED KERNEL. Not every project has a demigod dictator who burned his internal filter in the name of code correctness to force them to fix their shit. That it took Linus to resolve the issue in an INIT SYSTEM is a goddamned joke.

Point?

[Anonymous Coward]

SP3?

Re:Point?

[unixisc]

Non-Volatile Dual In-line Memory Module (NVDIMM)

Is that another way of saying 'PCIe SSD'?

Good.

[Anonymous Coward]

Now we can give Linus back his blanket.

Just wait for 6.4!

[Gravis Zero]

Upon the release of Linux 6.4, Time magazine will officially declare it to be "Year of the Linux Desktop"... in memoriam of Linus. :(

RIP Linus 20XX: that badger was too fast for anyone to dodge.

Re:Just wait for 6.4!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the year of the trifecta:

1) Linux on the desktop
2) Cubs win the World Series
3) President Trump!

Re: Just wait for 6.4!

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't back to the future predict all of these?

Linux Torvalds is an fucking idiot

[Anonymous Coward]

and he has an fucking idiot haircut.

Re:Linux Torvalds is an fucking idiot

[Anonymous Coward]

At least he has hair, unlike you.

Re:Linux Torvalds is an fucking idiot

[Anonymous Coward]

I shave my balls so you can gag and my cock and not on my pubes.

Linux Torvalds sends his regards

[Anonymous Coward]

https://regmedia.co.uk/2015/07...

Re:Linux Torvalds sends his regards

[zoid.com]

Linux is a punk.

Re:Linux Torvalds sends his regards

[Anonymous Coward]

Well the kernel does support GPU now. Are we still going to need to rely on those crappy ati and nvidia driver packages. They do suck

Nine, Maybe Ten, How About Eleven

[Anonymous Coward]

No less than eight release candidates. But how many release candidates were there?

Re: Nine, Maybe Ten, How About Eleven

[Anonymous Coward]

I like this part: "Release Candidate testing versions that early adopters were able to compile and install on their GNU/Linux operating system to test..."

Oh wow people were able to test the release candidates? If this isn't patently obvious then whomever needs to turn in their slashdot card.

There is a lot of stupid superfluous information being added to a lot of articles these days.

Re:Nine, Maybe Ten, How About Eleven

[sucko]

and in only 8 weeks. That's a lot of releases.

Does it?

[dohzer]

Does it have a new Easter Egg game to play when you click the Linux logo many times in a row?

Announcement

[hcs_$reboot]

The announcement was made from a balcony somewhere in Finland. We expect the video anytime now.

Re:Announcement

[Anonymous Coward]

The announcement was made from a balcony somewhere in Finland. We expect the video anytime now.

So fucking META

Re:Announcement

[MayeulC]

I'm So Meta, Even This Acronym

Re:Announcement

[swillden]

The announcement was made from a balcony somewhere in Oregon. We expect the video anytime now.

FTFY.

Woops

[MayeulC]

I was planning for at least one more RC, looks like I will have to hurry to catch the merge window.

Was there any swearing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I pretty much expect anything from him also comes with a dose of vulgarity.

Go ahead, mod me down, but you know it's true.

Re:SLASHDOT IS DELETING COMMENTS. NIGGERMANIA

[Anonymous Coward]

awful lot of hate coming from you, what's the matter? did mommy not pay enough attention to you as a baby? or did your gf/wife leave you for a black man? or is it simply penis envy turned into hate? most homophobes are aroused by gay porn, wonder why? life is too fucking short to have that much hate, and you spam that nonsense here often, is it your only goal from your moms basement? what a sad life you live, now run along and get back to your super secret stash of gay black porn you fap to so regularly while putting make-up on in the mirror mid dick tuck.

Re: SLASHDOT IS DELETING COMMENTS. NIGGERMANIA

[Anonymous Coward]

He does it to make you angry and your own hate feeds his laughter. Don't browse at -1 or don't validate the simplest trolls..

err rapid release ?

[Anonymous Coward]

is linux becoming firefox? do I have to tell you all how many husbands the kernel will have by the end of the week?

Re: systemd

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure about my sexual identity. Should i use systemd or init?

Linus & co. - if you're reading this

[Anonymous Coward]

THANK YOU Linus and ALL collaborators who made this happen!

Can't wait it to hit jessie-backports ;-)

Misleading summary as usual.

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot of things have been fixed since last week's RC8 milestone

vs the actual announcement:

So the last week was really quiet, which maybe means that I could
probably just have skipped rc8 after all. Oh well, no real harm done.
[snip]
Anyway, there's a few stragging fixes since rc8... [snip]

All of it pretty small, and there really aren't that many of them.

Torvalds is a sell-out

[Anonymous Coward]

How much of it was funded by the corporate overlords that own Linux?

it's gotta be a forgery..

[Anonymous Coward]

not a cuss word or insult to be found anywhere in that announcement.

Re: systemd

[Anonymous Coward]

You should use systemd. init is risky until you're sure what 'it' is and where it's going 'in'.

Wow

[Psychotria]

Years ago when I first started reading slashdot, a story about Linux kernel release (even though they often weren't all that interesting) generated interesting discussions. I see just 2 comments here so far that are not stupid. The rest are bad attempts at trolling, or for some reason using the story to talk about systemd, or very bad attempts at humour (humour is better than the rest of the shit though... I like humour if it's actually funny). It seems that the real nerds have abandoned slashdot entirely :(

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

and where does your little moan fit into the categories that you've defined for us? It certainly isn't in the 'interesting' one.

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

When we started using Linux a new kernel release was a bigger deal. I mean honestly, how much discussion can you have over two whole months worth of new hardware drivers?

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

Years ago when I first started reading slashdot, a story about Linux kernel release (even though they often weren't all that interesting) generated interesting discussions. I see just 2 comments here so far that are not stupid. The rest are bad attempts at trolling, or for some reason using the story to talk about systemd, or very bad attempts at humour (humour is better than the rest of the shit though... I like humour if it's actually funny). It seems that the real nerds have abandoned slashdot entirely :(

What is there to discuss about two months of Linux development? If THAT's the most exciting thing in news for nerds right now, it's no wonder /. is full of so much political junk.

So since you brought up systemd. Linux needs to modernize. Go ahead and fork a distro to preserve whatever old school unix-like feel is left, but the rest of the world needs modern systems software. If it doesn't get modernized, it wil get replaced. Android style probably, not love Microsoft again style I mean, but why rule that out. RedHat knows this, but I don't think they are cut out for the task...

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know whether or not you're trolling. What do "modernize" and "modern systems software" mean in your post?

Re: Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

When the repacement is worse than the original and new issues are found daily (actually faster than they can be fixed) maybe that alternative should be skipped...... Sure we shall try to improve things but when none of the promises have been fulfilled maybe we should have a closer look at what we are doing....

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

need to modernize doesn't mean follow through with this systemd shitstorm pushed by stupid people

Eight RCs?

[allo]

That's not good sign. Either Linus doesn't understand what a RC is, or each of them still had bugs nobody noticed before, which is a bad sign for the code.

A RC is something, which can be renamed to a final version, unless somebody finds a critical last minute bug.

Re:Eight RCs?

[gmack]

On something as complicated as an OS, there will be bugs that are workload or hardware dependent and won't show up until the wider pool of people start testing it and that, as it turns out, is when RC1 gets released. .

Re:Eight RCs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you working at Microsoft's Windows division? On many other places, a RC is tested and if bugs are found out, there will be fixes and new RCs until the software is considered stable. On some companies RC is the first version that compiles and which is shipped on next day.

Re:Eight RCs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or alternatively, there is a lack of understanding of the Linux kernel development process.

Re:Eight RCs?

[allo]

If you're ending up having eight RC, you did not have long enough beta phase before. An RC should not require any further snapshot. It can happen (that's why you have a RC), but more than let's say RC3 is a bad sign.
It may happen for one release, because you don't go back from rc2 to beta8, but if it happens on a matured project, that's strange.

Re:Eight RCs?

[allo]

alpha-beta-RC-final is independend from the process. The process of the kernel would require many beta-releases, but not many RCs. If they label it correctly and it's not totally broken (i would guess it's not).

Isn't every release

[sabbede]

the latest and most advanced?

Re:systemd

[Anonymous Coward]

systemd is a pile of horse shit, sysvinit is a pile of cow shit.

Either way you've got a big stinking pile of shit.

Pretend I'm a 4th grader...

[Anonymous Coward]

The kernel now supports the Raspberry Pi 3 SoC"

Practically, what does this comment mean for the Pi that we don't have already?

Re:Pretend I'm a 4th grader...

[Anonymous Coward]

Eh, running it on the Raspi 3?

Re:systemd

[number6x]

systemd is a pile of horse shit that was thrown into a fan so it sprayed everywhere, touched everything and contaminated what it touched.

sysvinit is a pile of cow shit, in a field somewhere, touching only the ground it rests on. Don't go to that field and step in that pile and it won't bother you.

If there are bugs in sysvinit, they affect sysvinit. If there are bugs in systemd, its everyone else's fault and everyone else should re-write their software to handle the bugs in systemd because the systemd developers are way too important to waste their incredible talent fixing their own bugs.

What OpenRC ?

[DrYak]

What? OpenRC? Why run a mean a lean init system written C ? The heresy !

When you could show the world how geeky you are by running a horrible pile of hacked-together shell-scripts as the gods themselves (= Old versions of UNIX) intended ?
With said shell script running inside bash, a shell interpreter whose BUG manpage section not only opens with... :

It's too big and too slow.

...but also a shell interpreter that features full blown networking support out of the box ?

Turn your geek card, you non-Sysvinit / non-Bash script heretic !

Re:What OpenRC ?

[arth1]

What? OpenRC? Why run a mean a lean init system written C ? The heresy !

You're confusing sysv init with sysv rc. Gentoo uses sysv init - no need to replace the init system with something complex. OpenRC is a replacement for what init calls - the rc handler, which doesn't need pid 1.

Personally, I like many of openrc's ideas, but not the implementation. I like good old-fashioned runlevels, and not named abstractions that may differ from system to system. Predictability is good. So are posix scripts, which continue working even on systems where /bin/sh is lightweight ash or some other bourne family shell that isn't bash.

Re:What OpenRC ?

[Rutulian]

I like good old-fashioned runlevels, and not named abstractions that may differ from system to system

Um, why do you think "old-fashioned" runlevels are any less abstract than named process groups. A runlevel is just a group of processes to start that happens to be named as a number (ex: runlevel 3 could just as easily be "network-enabled" and function identically). The fact that most linux distributions used runlevels may have been a convention, but it was hardly a standard. In fact, Red Hat famously used runlevel 5 to distinguish between an X and console environment, whereas Debian used runlevel 3 to distinguish between single-user vs multi-user environment regardless of whether there was a desktop session manager running. So I would definitely call runlevels "named abstractions that may differ from system to system". Since derivative distributions (ex: Ubuntu from Debian and Mandrake from Red Hat) tended to adopt the original's runlevel classification, it may have given the appearance that there was a de facto standard, but there really wasn't.

Predictability is good.

Correct. Which includes knowing that your processes actually started and not just that you told them to start, but maybe they failed, when you change runlevels.

So are posix scripts, which continue working even on systems where /bin/sh is lightweight ash or some other bourne family shell that isn't bash.

Some do, some don't. It depends on who wrote the script. When Ubuntu switched to dash, which was one of the first attempts to speed up boot times years ago, quite a few of the boot scripts broke and had to be rewritten. If you upgraded Ubuntu and suddenly one of your services didn't start, switching back to bash was usually the easiest fix. They eventually ironed out all of the bugs, but it was shaky for a while.

Re:What OpenRC ?

[arth1]

Correct. Which includes knowing that your processes actually started and not just that you told them to start, but maybe they failed, when you change runlevels.

Um, no. That's not predictability, that's assumptions.
One of the absolute worst features of systemd (and inittab when abused) is automatic restart. Predictability is to know that when a daemon crashes, it will stay down so you can investigate why it crashed, and not have log files and other evidence overwritten by a watchdog you didn't even set up to do so attempting to restart it.
Being able to single-step through the startup sequence one script at a time. Because the start order is 100% predictable.

As for what starts and stops at each runlevel, that's as easy as an "ls". Beats grepping a myriad of MSDOS ini files (and grep doesn't work all that well with ini files in the first place, given that you can have the same keyword in different sections), or using specialized tools that aren't even available because your system didn't boot far enough.

I have tried systemd. And I find it to combine the worst aspects of Windows 95 .ini files and the admin-unfriendliness of IBMs smit. No, thanks. After the first crash where I couldn't fail over to another machine, I said enough is enough.

Re:What OpenRC ?

[Rutulian]

One of the absolute worst features of systemd (and inittab when abused) is automatic restart.

I never said anything about automatic restart. Systemd allows you to be alerted to and to respond to process failures. To me, that's predictability. If I start a bunch of network services and one of them fails, systemd will decide whether to continue (ie: the dependency tree allows it) or to fail. Regardless, the outcome is entirely predictable. Services that depend on other services (which includes the target state itself) will have all of their dependencies satisfied, or they won't be started, and anything that fails will be logged in a consistent manner that is easily parseable by a system monitoring utility. When you "telinit 3", sysvinit runs all of the scripts in /etc/rc3.d and if they start they start, if they fail they fail. It's up to you to scrape the logs and keep tabs on all of the daemons. The state "runlevel 3" is not guaranteed.

Because the start order is 100% predictable.

Ah, ok, that's a different kind of predictable. I agree, start order is not predictable with systemd. I would argue, though, that it doesn't need to be because you have explicit dependencies that allow depending on the actual started and functioning state of a prior process (as opposed to just a numbering scheme), and logged events that allow you to determine precisely when and where (and often why) a dependency tree failed. You don't need to step through the boot process one script at a time because the log tells you exactly what failed, and you can start your debugging there right at that point.

As for what starts and stops at each runlevel, that's as easy as an "ls". Beats grepping a myriad of MSDOS ini files

Agreed that it isn't quite as nice and easy as an "ls", but it definitely is not as complicated as grepping the unit files and trying to figure out when things start. The nice thing about explicitly declaring your dependencies is that you can have systemd show them to you. Let it do the work so you don't have to.

And I find it to combine the worst aspects of Windows 95 .ini files

That's kind of funny because .ini files were one of the better parts of Win95. They were simple text, easy to read and edit (by a human) configuration files, that happened to use [bracketed] headers, but whatever. Samba actually uses that convention for smb.conf, by the way. Anyway, Win became much worse when they took away the .ini files and replaced them with the registry. If I need to change a configuration, I would rather do it in a plain non-executable text file, rather than something structured but cumbersome like XML, or something with variables and conditionals built-in but takes time to parse and study like a shell script.

Re:What OpenRC ?

[Rutulian]

As for what starts and stops at each runlevel, that's as easy as an "ls". Beats grepping a myriad of MSDOS ini files

Agreed that it isn't quite as nice and easy as an "ls",

Scratch that. It is as easy as an "ls". I was poking around in the /etc/systemd directory and realized /etc/systemd/system is functionally equivalent to /etc/rcX.d/. It is maintained by the systemd daemon, but it consists of a bunch of symlinks to service unit files that allow you to very quickly and easily see which services are dependencies of a particular target.

Moving faster?

[furry_wookie]

Is it just me or are the version numbers accelerating?

Redhat Enterprise is still running 3.10 in its latest release. At this pace it seems like Linus will be well into 5.x, or 6.x before Redhat 8 ever comes out(probably beta next year).

Re:Moving faster?

[kwalker]

The way Linus runs the kernel version numbers, yes, they are moving faster than they used to. It used to be that he would work on 2.x.y, then y+1 and so on. Now he works on 4.x and eventually they proclaim one to be "LTS" (in this case 3.10) and another trusted lieutenant maintains that tree for a while, and Linus works on 4.x+1.

And especially with the way Red Hat prefers stable kernels, they always track LTS, regardless of what Linus is working on.

systemd dependency

[Anonymous Coward]

arth's point was that the kernel, new or old, doesn't require systemd.

I'm sure Lenning is working on changing that. :)

Re:systemd

[Barsteward]

yaaawwnnnnn......

Re: systemd

[Anonymous Coward]

So he speaks the truth then? You didn't debate him or even question him. You yawned, I'm guessing because you are tired of hearing the truth about primadonna systemd developers.

That was quick

[TylerJWhit]

4.0 just came out a couple of months ago and now we're on 4.8. That's fast. Did Linus choose a different numbering scheme for the Linux kernel?

Re:That was quick

[Anonymous Coward]

4.0 just came out a couple of months ago and now we're on 4.8. That's fast. Did Linus choose a different numbering scheme for the Linux kernel?

It's the Google Chrome Numbering System. The major revision increments once per week whether you did any work or not.

Re:That was quick

[emmamai]

4.0 was released a year and a half ago, and new releases come out approximately every 2 months.

Ever since 3.0 came out, the numbering scheme has simply been "Increment the minor number every release. Increment the major one whenever we feel like it."

Re:That was quick

[TylerJWhit]

Wow, time flies. I didn't realize it had already been a year and a half.

Still Wish it were Micro-Kernal.

[BrendaEM]

Sorry. I love the community, but I wish the kernel was more modular and adaptable without recompiling.

Re:Still Wish it were Micro-Kernal.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nothing stopping you from writing a kernel.

Re:Still Wish it were Micro-Kernel.

[unixisc]

If that's what you want, just go w/ Minix 3.x. Or do you have anything against NetBSD userland?

Re: systemd

[Barsteward]

he/she certainly knows nothing hence the yawn and its from hearing tired old crap from adolescent ignorant trolls