Slashdot Mirror


Linus Torvalds Says 'Buggy Crap' Made It Into Linux 4.8 (theregister.co.uk)

Two days after Linus Torvalds announced the release of Linux 4.8, he began apologizing for a bug fix gone bad. The Register reports: "I'm really sorry I applied that last series from Andrew just before doing the 4.8 release, because they cause problems, and now it is in 4.8 (and that buggy crap is marked for stable too)." The "crap" in question is an attempt to fix a bug that's been present in Linux since version 3.15. Torvalds rates the fix for that bug "clearly worse than the bug it tried to fix, since that original bug has never killed my machine!" Torvalds isn't happy with kernel contributor Andrew Morton, who he says is debugging with a known bad use of BUG_ON(). "I've ranted against people using BUG_ON() for debugging in the past. Why the f*ck does this still happen?" Torvalds writes, pointing to a 2002 post to the kernel mailing list outlining how to do BUG_ON() right. He later adds "so excuse me for being upset that people still do this shit almost 15 years later."

294 comments

  1. in other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    we're introducing systemgdb

    1. Re:in other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      we're introducing systemgdb

      Are you that upstart?

  2. I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by JoeyRox · · Score: 5, Funny

    So that I can live a lifetime where I never make a mistake and everyone in the world is a moron compared to me.

    1. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He is the teacher...

      BUG_ON()
      BUG_OFF()

      slashdot filters still need work...

    2. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by bfpierce · · Score: 5, Funny

      Good News.

      All you need to do is download and run a linux distro, enter any Microsoft or Apple thread/forum/subreddit and act like this all the time!

    3. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Carewolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So that I can live a lifetime where I never make a mistake and everyone in the world is a moron compared to me.

      Well, he makes alot of mistakes and often even admits to them, but that just doesn't make as good news and doesn't get spreads as wide when he is being impolite or arrogant.

    4. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by GerryGilmore · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sure. Just be reincarnated as someone who writes a completely new UNIX-compatible OS using a radical new software licensing scheme, attract multiple developers and users who allow same OS to be a transformational force in the computing industry and grow to be the most-used server OS in history, Then - and only then - can you apply, Asshat.

    5. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You can also add that it is running on a huge number of mobile devices, likely making it one of the most installed and in-use operating systems ever developed.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    6. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      The OS has his name on it, heaven forbid he wants it to be good.

    7. Re: I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wasn't there a movie in the 80s about that?

    8. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True enough. And all by raw skill too! Not a single bit of luck in its uptake or popularity.

      Like how Facebook, SnapChat, Windows, etc... are all absolutely brilliant, and entering the market at the right time have nothing to do with their popularity.

    9. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Which is relevant how?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    10. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is admitting that he made the mistake of approving this change. It is his mistake and he is admitting it. He's a maintainer/integrator/project-manager more than a developer nowadays, so yes, the "code" is someone else's mistake, but approving it is his. He is not denying that. What aren't you understanding?

    11. Re: I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, I was suppose to download the OS before declaring my superiority?
      I've been doing it wrong.

    12. Re: I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      never explain. :)

    13. Re: I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Sweep the disk, Johnny!"

    14. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I'd love to be able to read all of the last 15 years of a forum-based documentation stream before writing my first line of code too. But it won't happen. You learn how the code works by reading the code, not by digesting the documentation. So it's too bad if we weren't in the crowd of cool kids 15 years old, if you want new generations to write code then you have to stop expecting them to know everything on the first day.

    15. Re: I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Funny

      The download takes awhile, which is the perfect time to go to the forums and declare your superiority.

    16. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Oh, is it Unix compatible now?

    17. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine talking to a child. Now imagine that you can't reprimand the child, that the child can and will make decisions which affect you directly and indirectly, that you can't realistically expect the child to do anything you tell it to do, but that you nevertheless depend on the child's cooperation to get anything done, and of course that the child never learns. Imagine that all your interactions with other people are like that. Do you still want to live that life?

    18. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Well, you can't have that, but you are capable of wasting your time posting ridiculous comments that in no way map to the reality of the situation!

      Ever heard of penis envy? Well you have the Torvolds variant.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    19. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      You could add that, but you would be ignorant to do so, what with that being completely untrue and all. See also Open Handset Alliance.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    20. Re: I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You can also add that it's the most used in supercomputing, so it basically is the substrate of modern science and math at this point.

    21. Re: I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh fuck right the fuck off. Linus made his own shit and had to tank a.s.t. on a newsgroup, the Minix guy who filled his rant with comical predictions that would all be proven wrong. The guy with a professorship and an OS and books and legitimacy. Either lead with your own kernel, follow by reading the docs, or gtfo the way.
      Be a badass punk, or don't be a punk at all.

    22. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So it's too bad if we weren't in the crowd of cool kids 15 years old, if you want new generations to write code then you have to stop expecting them to know everything on the first day.

      It wasn't the person in question's first day. That's Linus's point and why he gets angry like this. Call it being an asshole - but he's not being totally unreasonable.

    23. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Raenex · · Score: 2

      Well, he makes alot of mistakes and often even admits to them

      But there's nobody who's going to call him a fucking moron and revoke his privs from committing code.

    24. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Raenex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      writes a completely new UNIX-compatible OS

      He only wrote the kernel for an i386 machine. And he cloned an existing system's functionality instead of writing a new system. You know, the same thing he flamed Tridgell for.

      using a radical new software licensing scheme

      He chose GPL so he could use the already written GNU code to plug his kernel into. You know, the bulk of the code that made up the OS. I always thought Stallman was petty about trying to call Linux, "GNU/Linux", but it's posts like yours that show he had a point. A typical Linux system has vast amount of work put into it that has nothing to do with the kernel or Linus, other than they need some kernel to run on.

      attract multiple developers and users

      Yes, he did that. Mostly as a matter of right place and right time, but he deserves credit for taking the ball, running with it, and achieving success.

    25. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Trust me. It isn't what it's cracked up to be.

      "Those of you who think you're perfect are really annoying to those of us who are."

    26. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Next you learn sweep, then sand-a-floor Daniel san.

    27. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Amazon begs to differ.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    28. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean so you can live a lifetime blaming others for everything. This is as much Linux Thorvald's fault as anyone's as he allowed this "buggy crap" into the kernel. That means he wasn't paying attention and that he made a mistake.

      I'm really getting sick of hearing this fat piece of crap whine about everyone and everything but himself. I'd beat the shit out of him if I ever met him.

    29. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      JoeySuxCox, is that you?

    30. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by quenda · · Score: 1

      Did Linus actually spell "fuck" with an asterisk?
      When did Linus become the sort of guy to edit his speech so as not to offend overly-sensitive idiots?
      Maybe he has been living in California too long.

    31. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      I always thought Stallman was petty about trying to call Linux, "GNU/Linux", but it's posts like yours that show he had a point.

      It's also illustrated by peoples saying "Well Android is just Linux". Yeah it runs the kernel, but it's not Linux like, e.g. ubuntu or deadrat or arch is Linux. Calling it GNU/Linux does avoid that confusion too.

      Funny thing is Stallman specifically pointed out that problem *years* before it happened. I remember having some stupid flamy conversations on usenet about it. I can't even remember which side I was on. But either way Stallman was right, something he has an annoying habit of being.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    32. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He only wrote the kernel for an i386 machine.

      Granted it was "only" the kernel and original for an i386 machine, but HURD is still very much only a toy--no offense to its developers--and has not remotely attracted the sort of interest as Linux has. No doubt this is precisely because of the constant push for pragmatic action now and a willing to do drastic rewrites later. Hence the reason that if anything Linux can on most system but is actually to the point of not running on an i386 machine.

      And he cloned an existing system's functionality instead of writing a new system.

      Yes and no. He didn't really clone Minix at a functional level as he went for a monolithic kernel. No doubt because monolithic kernels are a lot easier to write. Paradoxically all the work to move towards message passing microkernels (and the like) for reliability leads to things like, oh, systemd's init crashing over a trivial bug. Beyond that, sure the result was aimed at cloning *nix-like functionality. To that end, there's tons of general similarities between it and other *nix-like systems just intrinsically. However...

      You know, the same thing he flamed Tridgell for.

      No. He flamed Tridgell because Linus liked Bitkeeper and didn't want others to rock the boat over some ideological view about freedom. Meanwhile, Tridgell just wanted to get at the metadata so he didn't have to blindly rely upon Bitkeeper or its continuous gracious support. In the end, Linus' short-sightedness was wrong and we're all better off for Tridgell's actions--it led to git. Yet if no one had made a big stink about it, especially Bitkeeper's maker, odds are good we'd have seen an open source Bitkeeper that would still be behind the official version and people would use both.

      He chose GPL so he could use the already written GNU code to plug his kernel into.

      That's not how copyright works. The GNU code is userland and generally not derivative of the underlying kernel. By your logic, WSL would have to be open source. No, he chose the GPL because he didn't want others taking his code and just using it without contributing back.

      You know, the bulk of the code that made up the OS.

      systemd? I kid, I kid. Seriously, though, now days for most people the majority of the code is in the widget library and probably the GPU compositor. Hell, even the web browser itself tends to be larger.

      I always thought Stallman was petty about trying to call Linux, "GNU/Linux", but it's posts like yours that show he had a point.

      Oh, Stallman did have a point back when Linux started out. At this point, though, there's way too much software involved for it to really make sense to call it GNU/ or KDE/ or GTK/ or whatever/Linux. Linux now just denotes the kernel and same vague notion of the overlaid userland. Not that I have an issue with people calling it GNU/Linux if they like. But there's plenty of Busybox/Linux out there and Android/Linux and people rarely care about the subtle distinction about the former while the latter is just called something else (Android).

      A typical Linux system has vast amount of work put into it that has nothing to do with the kernel or Linus, other than they need some kernel to run on.

      Yet it is the kernel of choice for the driver support and scalability.

      Yes, he did that. Mostly as a matter of right place and right time, but he deserves credit for taking the ball, running with it, and achieving success.

      That latter part is probably the biggest part. Plenty of people have made *nix-like OSs--they were and are still relative toys. Hell, *BSD are actually UNIX and the lawsuits were pretty well settled around the time of Linux's start, so that wasn't it. In the end, what drove in dev

    33. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But there's nobody who's going to call him a fucking moron and revoke his privs from committing code.

      Actually he has called himself a moron on occasion. He flames himself as hard as he flames people with thinner skin.
      I'm not sure what it would take for him to revoke his own privs, but if he were to refuse to fix his own mistakes then he wouldn't really need the revoked, would he?

    34. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never got that. Why would it become less offensive just because you spell it with an asterisk. Is * less offensive than u?
      Considering how common it is to spell it that way, everyone who knows one of the spellings knows both so it won't trick anyone.

      I guess the main reason to use the asterisk spelling is to trick automatic censoring into thinking that it isn't that word.

    35. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Well you're already posting on Slashdot, it's a good start bud

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    36. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Raenex · · Score: 1

      No doubt this is precisely because of the constant push for pragmatic action now and a willing to do drastic rewrites later.

      Worse is better in action.

      Beyond that, sure the result was aimed at cloning *nix-like functionality.

      Right, I was talking about this, not Minix.

      He flamed Tridgell because Linus liked Bitkeeper and didn't want others to rock the boat over some ideological view about freedom.

      That was the real reason that anybody with half a brain knew. But what he said in public was:

      "He didn't create something new and impressive. He just tore down something new (and impressive) because he could, and rather than helping others, he screwed people over. And you expect me to _respect_ that kind of behaviour?"

      What a hypocritical dick. I wonder if he's ever apologized for that one, or acknowledged his mistake? Maybe to this day he still thinks that bullshit is right.

      That's not how copyright works. The GNU code is userland and generally not derivative of the underlying kernel.

      I didn't say the kernel was derivative. But nobody ships just kernels to end users. They ship operating systems, including the kernel and the userland tools "as part of a whole", and that's where the GPL kicks in.

      No, he chose the GPL because he didn't want others taking his code and just using it without contributing back.

      No, he really did choose the GPL because he wanted to plug his kernel into GNU. There's a post from the early days somewhere in Usenet archives where he states this. Choosing GPL was the path of least resistance.

    37. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Maybe he was talking about RMS. That guy really did change the world with his radical new licencing scheme and free software movement. He created the GNU operating system brought a large number of people on-board. All without being an abrasive asshat to people who contributed to the project.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    38. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I kinda thought he said that putting out 4.8 when it had this problem was his mistake?

    39. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by lroylw · · Score: 0

      These are the same people who think Steve Jobs invented the mouse, and Bill Gates and Paul Allen wrote MS DOS in their garage in their spare time.

    40. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      So that I can live a lifetime where I never make a mistake and everyone in the world is a moron compared to me.

      Trust me, you don't.

    41. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you a fuckin moron? He starts specifically by apologising for his mistake (I'm really sorry I applied that last series)...its right there at the start of the bloody summary...learn to fuckin read

    42. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by EndlessNameless · · Score: 2

      You learn how the code works by reading the code, not by digesting the documentation. So it's too bad if we weren't in the crowd of cool kids 15 years old, if you want new generations to write code then you have to stop expecting them to know everything on the first day.

      That's a good point, but it's not relevant. Linus is excoriating Andrew Morton, one of the lead developers. He has been working on the kernel for over a decade.

      It is one of Andrew's responsibilities to reach out to contributors to correct this kind of mistake. So, yes, it is reasonable to be angry at him over this.

      If you are new, then someone like Andrew should have a process to catch your mistakes and bring you up to speed.

      --

      ---
      According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    43. Re: I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux is not used in large enterprise business servers with as many as 16 or even 32 sockets. That domain belongs exclusively to Unix and Mainframes. Oracle Solaris and IBM AIX. The largest business server out there is a 64-socket SPARC Fujitsu M10-4S with 64TB RAM. All the business top benchmarks such as SAP, SIEBEL, database TPC etc - belong to large risc servers running Unix. There are is not one single x86 server running Linux on those benchmarks. The reason is because Linux dont scale above 8-sockets. Linux runs fine on scale-out clusters (supercomputers) but not on a scale-up business server. Just google yourself and check top SAP scores, TPC, etc.

    44. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      It's a variety of traditional politeness, like saying heck instead of hell. People will think slightly better of you if you use less vulgar language.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    45. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He chose GPL so he could use the already written GNU code to plug his kernel into.

      Are you saying that the GNU software did not execute on top of his kernel until he used the same license?

      GPL did not attempt to prevent people from running their software inside a closed system until GPLv3 (IIRC, using GPL code like Tivo did was one of the main things GPLv3 was supposed to prevent).

    46. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that the GNU software did not execute on top of his kernel until he used the same license?

      I've already commented on this, presumably to another Anonymous Coward: "But nobody ships just kernels to end users. They ship operating systems, including the kernel and the userland tools "as part of a whole", and that's where the GPL kicks in."

      It's about distributing the GPL code "as part of a whole".

      GPL did not attempt to prevent people from running their software inside a closed system until GPLv3 (IIRC, using GPL code like Tivo did was one of the main things GPLv3 was supposed to prevent).

      The Tivo thing is a different issue. All the code was GPL, but the user had no access to it because the hardware was locked.

    47. Re:I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by Bengie · · Score: 1

      A moron in a hurry makes mistakes. We've all been there, and it will happen again. Where we should not make mistakes is when doing something of high importance where you have time and you need to research to make sure you do it correctly. When I have an issue that requires more time thinking than coding, I almost never make mistakes, and especially not obvious mistakes.

      My last potential bug was when I was assigning values in a struct. While I made sure the order of the memory locations being assigned were thread-safe, I only realized later that because the struct was larger than 8 bytes(on a 64bit system), the values in the struct would require two writes to fully copy the data. This could have caused a torn read. None of the other programmers reviewing my code noticed this glaring issue.

      In this situation I to was a moron in a hurry. Luckily, when I read code, I think about what it compiles down into. Something about this code was making a voice in my mind say something was wrong. I seem to have a strong intuition, I always have, even when I first started coding. If I wasn't told to completely write an 8 week project in 1 week, I probably would not have submitted my code for review prior to noticing such a horrible bug.

    48. Re: I want to be reincarnated as Linus Torvalds by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Linux is not used in large enterprise business servers with as many as 16 or even 32 sockets.

      That's not what came up when I did a Google search on "IBM Linux". IBM has been a fan for a long time, and IIRC made it work on their mainframe architecture.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  3. Maybe fix your own damn bug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's open source, so anyone can contribute, even the guy that invented it, right????

  4. Prozac time? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Linus has the Get-Off-My-Lawn bug.

  5. Tired by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This bug make my sad... i'm going to switch to a better GNU alternative... i'm moving to HURD !

    1. Re:Tired by unixisc · · Score: 0

      What's wrong w/ the BSDs? Do you have to have GPL v3.0?

  6. "there is NO EXCUSE to knowingly kill the kernel" by JoeyRox · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually Linus, there is a good excuse - when the failing of a logic assertion could silently lead to behavior that is worse than a kernel halt, specifically data corruption.

  7. better to snipe at successful people on /. by HBI · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    After all, doing something useful with your life is meaningless.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    1. Re:better to snipe at successful people on /. by HBI · · Score: 1

      Enjoy the cancer.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    2. Re:better to snipe at successful people on /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Enjoy your AIDS.

    3. Re:better to snipe at successful people on /. by HBI · · Score: 1

      That's you with the IV drugs and the anal sex, not me. :-)

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    4. Re:better to snipe at successful people on /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, you mean like how Torvalds is constantly sniping at developers who spend their own time contributing to Linux?

      And at least GP is sniping at someone in the public eye who deserves it. You're sniping at random strangers on an internet forum, which makes you a much bigger loser.

    5. Re:better to snipe at successful people on /. by Hylandr · · Score: 1

      You are a degenerate.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    6. Re:better to snipe at successful people on /. by zidium · · Score: 1

      He may even be one of Hillary's Deplorables!!!

      --
      Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
    7. Re:better to snipe at successful people on /. by HBI · · Score: 0

      Nope, at complete losers who think their opinion is important. The gnashing of teeth and whining like your post above makes my day. Thank you.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    8. Re:better to snipe at successful people on /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So then why are you posting your opinion?

    9. Re:better to snipe at successful people on /. by HBI · · Score: 2

      Where did I volunteer an opinion? I restated the parent's opinion with clarity, removing the sophistry. If you choose to take it as negative, well, then probably the parent post shouldn't exist.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    10. Re: better to snipe at successful people on /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hitler

      (someone had to say it)

    11. Re: better to snipe at successful people on /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually most of the code is written by people on someones payroll to support their crap hardware. That is how Linux manages to support current hardware. That is also important to ms windows but they may have better testing. Or did.

    12. Re:better to snipe at successful people on /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cry moar. Every message you have posted here is an opinion. The concept shouldn't be this difficult to for you to grasp.

  8. 15 years is nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's been 48 years since Nixon*, and we're still repeating that mistake...

    *48 years, 4.8, let's just name the kernel after him

    1. Re:15 years is nothing by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

      Wow, so it was Nixon who started using BUG_ON() wrong?

      Bet it was that slimy rat Kissinger. I never trusted his patches.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  9. Ranting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    "I've ranted against people using BUG_ON() for debugging in the past. Why the f*ck does this still happen?"

    Maybe because ranting is not an effective method of communicating?

    1. Re:Ranting by rubycodez · · Score: 1, Informative

      Hitler proved it was, got a whole nation to follow him

    2. Re:Ranting by DamnOregonian · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      That's a funny spelling of "Trump"

    3. Re:Ranting by rubycodez · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The corporate fascists running this country don't care whether you vote for the buffoon or the crook, really doesn't matter

    4. Re:Ranting by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The Corporate Fascists want a stable and predictable economy in which the rules are well understood and consistent. They also of course want anything they can get for free and also want a pony. Most of the Corporate Fascist Interests perfectly overlap with most of the population.

      Obviously we need to be diligent in ensuring that they don't get everything they want for free but it's completely wrong to say that they prefer the buffoon to the crook. The "crook" is accused of storing a few documents that shouldn't have been stored in email. That doesn't really affect the stability of world markets or the predictability of society. In fact like 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999% of the world, the Crook's emails don't affect them in the slightest. On the other hand a trade war with China would affect everybody including the Corporate Fascists' interests negatively.

      If my choice is supporting corporate fascists or supporting anarchists I'll pick the corporate fascists any day. Corporate fascists interest far more often overlap with most of the population's self-interest. Rarely to anarchists' interests overlap with anyone else's since by definition they're only looking out for themselves.

      The Corporate Fascists are like an ox. If you don't mind them they'll trample the crops and eat your food reserves. If you watch them and regulate them you can use them to plow your fields.

    5. Re:Ranting by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      The corporate fascists running this country don't care whether you vote for the buffoon or the crook, really doesn't matter

      Trump is both the buffoon and the crook. Clinton is the status quo candidate. The corporate fascists do care very much. Trump might upset the spreadsheets.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Ranting by Raenex · · Score: 0

      The "crook" is accused of storing a few documents that shouldn't have been stored in email.

      If by few, do you mean thousands? Because she shouldn't have been routing her government email through her own server in the first place. But more importantly, Crooked Hillary has also been accused of running a pay-for-play scheme. It's part of a long history of Clinton scandals. They're like the mafia family that never goes to prison.

    7. Re:Ranting by MancunianMaskMan · · Score: 1
      wow that's too may nines... forty of them.

      (1 - 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999%) of the mass of the earth is of the order of 10^-16 kg, that's a lot less than Clinton's email server weighs. If you consider the "world" to be the mass of the observable uinverse, that proportion would be about the mass of a large-ish comet,

    8. Re:Ranting by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      Having a criminal such as Clinton *does* pose risk to stability since they can be bribed or blackmailed

    9. Re:Ranting by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      Crooks like Clinton can be manipulated with evidence of past crimes, risky to status quo; her disregard for the rule of law is a threat to stability too

  10. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So... Linus reviews and approves a patch with code he knows causes issues (or should, since he "showed the right way" to do it 14 years ago), adds it to 4.8 after the last RC, releases 4.8, and THEN blows up at the original contributor for his own mistake in approving the patch? Dear god, someone get that man some Xanax, and take away his electronics for a week so he can calm the fuck down.

    1. Re:So... by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      you really thinks that he personally reviews and approves all those patches? This work is "outsourced" to the various subsystem maintainers, incidentally it's one such maintainer that Linux is directing the rant for approving the patch in question.

  11. Just remove it then by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I should have reacted to the damn added BUG_ON() lines. I suspect I will have to finally just remove the idiotic BUG_ON() concept once and for all

    Overlord issues 'BUG_ON() considered harmful' edict 14 years ago and only now thinks about removing said anti-feature?

    1. Re:Just remove it then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be because there _are_ situations where the only sane thing you can do is report the error and immediately halt the machine. The Overlord mentions one in this message in the thread:

      http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1610.0/01217.html

    2. Re:Just remove it then by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

      An interesting choice of comparisons.

      After writing the famous "Go to statement considered harmful" essay, Dijkstra himself soon recanted, and clarified that there are particular circumstances where GO TO is the most straightforward solution, and results in the most readable and maintainable code. Of course, by then it had already developed such a stigma that there are now languages lacking such a construct, and those particular circumstances are now written with uglier and more confusing code.

      It appears BUG_ON() is similar... There is a correct way to use it, that results in useful testing, perhaps better than any other method. Removing it completely may very well be a case where the cure is worse than the disease.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    3. Re:Just remove it then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, wasn't this the release that Slashdot breathlessly reported as having seven release candidates?

      So much for quality control.

    4. Re:Just remove it then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      goto is still just a workaround for languages that don't provide the rpoper constructs to create the intended logic cleanly

    5. Re:Just remove it then by Shane_Optima · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I tend to think rules like "Don't use GOTO" are a good indicator of someone's critical thinking ability. If they make a strong effort to avoid it, that's fine. If they stand there and lecture me that I should be using some convoluted crap instead of a simple, intelligently labeled GOTO to escape from some tangled mess of ifs and loops (not infrequently a mess that was originally created by the speaker) then they may well be very analytical and capable people, but you can't ever trust them to come up with something original or to spot a truly bad idea when they're in a group environment.

      And then there's another of people, whose eyes glaze over completely when you try to say "Look, every single If-then-else has an implicit GOTO. This bit right here is fundamentally a conditional jump as well, but it doesn't look good to structure it using only Ifs because..." These conversations invariably end with them wandering away mute (if they're peers) or "don't use GOTO. It's against best practices" if they're supervisors.

      I doubt I've used it a dozen times in my life, but I've received grief over almost every single time.

    6. Re:Just remove it then by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      "Goto considered harmful" was written in an era when structured programming was extremely rare. It in no way at all invalidated the use of goto. When you're using C, you don't have all the features that the millenial kids demand. And there is yet to be a good language that replaces C, so we're stuck using goto in some cases just to have more readable code than the alternative.

      But the anti-goto is so entrenched now that some people refuse to even use "continue", "break", or even mutiple returns from a function (never mind that their own code doesn't yet work and is chock full of errors, they will quickly and loudly point out that you did an early return).

    7. Re:Just remove it then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's been, like, busy... and shit...

    8. Re:Just remove it then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh. I encountered a dude who would rather write the code so that a compiler bug caused it to not output warnings when he called a function with the wrong types rather than use "ugly casting".
      Well, he probably didn't realize that it was a compiler bug that made his code compile cleanly and TBH I didn't feel like write a lecture about how the compiler made implicit casting for him at that time.

      Rules of thumbs are great, but people need to learn why the rules are there.
      I don't mind the "avoid using goto" and "avoid casting" rules. Whenever you encounter a situation where you want to use them you should probably stop and think if you are approaching the problem in the right way.
      Sometimes they are the best option and sometimes they make your code prone to strange bugs.
      I just wish that the saying was more along the lines of "think twice before using them" rather than "don't do it!"

      OTOH it might be a good idea that people avoid using them until they learn enough to realize that the rules are stupid and has to be broken sometimes.

    9. Re:Just remove it then by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      I've been writing code for thirty years, in a fairly wide range of languages, and on platforms from 8 bit micros to modern desktop machines. When I first discovered programming, the only language available to me was BASIC. Shortly after that I discovered C (via this weird C compiler for an Amstrad CPC that appeared to produce code that was even slower than BASIC, but that's another story). Shortly after *that* I stopped using goto, without any encouragement from Dijkstra, whom I've never read. Since that time, the only 'goto's' I've used, were jumps in assembly language. That's it.

      If people's eyes glaze over when you ramble on about how "if's" and "gotos" are the same thing, it's because you're not making any sense. If they wander away mute, it's because they've heard this from you before, and have grown tired of the argument. "Ifs" and "gotos" are obviously not the same, which is why they have different names. Put your code into a function, and return from it instead of using a goto. There is no universe in which this is not a better solution. Prove me wrong :).

    10. Re:Just remove it then by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Good embedded developers working in C use goto quite often. It's great for aborting and executing clean-up code (kind of like "finally" in some other languages) and most importantly it keeps code fairly flat. None of this 8 levels of indentation, now try go figure out which bracket to insert the error handling code after nonsense.

      Far more evil than goto are giant state machines, because being able to set the state at any time is effectively a delayed goto. You see them in embedded systems a lot because they get used to do a primitive kind of cooperative multitasking, and rapidly become a giant cross-wired mess.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:Just remove it then by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      But the anti-goto is so entrenched now that some people refuse to even use "continue", "break", or even mutiple returns from a function

      Does that include everyone who has to follow MISRA-C rules?

    12. Re:Just remove it then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have yet to find a case where GOTO would be preferable to break, continue, return, etc.

      I will admit to wanting do() until loops rather than hacking them with while loops a few times however.

    13. Re:Just remove it then by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I've never had to use MISRA C. It's a very strange beast. It's not used in any medical device software I've had to use, which is a place where safe coding is necessary. Some rules are very good ideas. Some rules though just seem arbitrary, like one person's personal guidelines turned into requirements. Ie, no non-constant function pointers, that's a very common and very useful programming method. That rule basically says don't even bother trying to be object oriented. Restrictions on gotos have nothing whatsoever to do with safety.

      But if you have to follow their guidelines because you've got a manager who belives in marketing, then you deal with it. Don't use the gotos. That does not mean the use of gotos by someone not following MISRA rules is wrong or misguided. If you've got a team coding standard that says no gotos and only single returns from functions, then you deal with that also.

    14. Re:Just remove it then by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I have yet to find a case where GOTO would be preferable to break, continue, return, etc.

      In C, you pretty much have to use goto to perform cleanup for early returns, for any resource that you might have acquired up to that point. Well, or else you repeat the cleanup code before every return (which is a recipe for bugs, because then a new resource gets used, and you forget to update some of that duplicate code).

    15. Re:Just remove it then by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      If you would care to read a bit more carefully, you would see that I never said that ifs and gotos were the same thing.

      People often describe goto as "unconditional jump" but that's a pretty misleading descriptor. It obviously can be used in a very specific and conditional manner; it's just that it can easily penetrate or break out of other flow control mechanisms in arbitrary ways. Sometimes that results in clearer code, sometimes not. It's never my first instinct, and like I said I haven't used it all that often.

      I'm usually pro- splitting things into smaller functions but having multiple exits are not going to make your code safer or easier to read vs. a goto. If moving it into another function isn't serving any another purpose then you're probably just making your code harder to follow. It's not about using gotos on a regular basis; it's about avoiding the cargo cult mentality that gotos inherently cause problems.

    16. Re:Just remove it then by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's precisely what I mean. Saying that gotos are inherently dangerous is fine as a loose rule of thumb, but if you're willing to make your function more fragile or less clear in a slavish, automatic deference to that rule of thumb...

    17. Re:Just remove it then by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      Ie, no non-constant function pointers, that's a very common and very useful programming method.

      It's something that is bound to blow up in your face on certain architectures, e.g. 8051.

      Also, non-constant function pointers are convenient, but do not offer any functionality that cannot be achieved with more transparent constructs like switch/case statements, jump tables or arrays (constant) function pointers.

      Restrictions on gotos have nothing whatsoever to do with safety.

      MISRA is not just about making the code safer, but also about making it easier to review and test. goto, continue, functions with multiple return statements and the like create additional possible code paths and tend to increase complexity. (That doesn't mean I completely agree with every MISRA rule. Some can be translated to "Code shall not contain (certain type of) bugs", for example.)

    18. Re:Just remove it then by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      I have yet to find a case where GOTO would be preferable to break, continue, return, etc.

      Breaking out of nested loops.

      for(i = 0; i < IMAX; i++)
      for(j = 0; j < JMAX; j++)
      for(k = 0; k < KMAX; k++)
      {
      if(do_stuff(i, j, k))
      goto done;
      }

      done:

  12. worse crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Introducing a change just prior to release? sorry but the only person to blame here is linus himself, BUG_ON() bad practises aside an even worse offense is introducing untested changes to code you are about to release.

    1. Re:worse crime by lord+merlin · · Score: 1

      This. Linus was the dumb one here.

  13. Good, he's waking up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fine, Linus, now move on to kill SystemD. Also, get someone to literally kill Poettering and Sievers.

    1. Re:Good, he's waking up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fine, Linus, now move on to kill SystemD. Also, get someone to literally kill Poettering and Sievers.

      Too bad he is mostly agreeing with out lord and savior Pöttering.

  14. You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustrati by raymorris · · Score: 5, Interesting

    > I want to ... live a lifetime where everyone in the world is a moron compared to me.

    You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustrating. When everyone is a moron (regarding the subject at hand), every interaction is frustrating.

    I don't *excuse* Linus's temperament when it comes to kernel goofs, but I do understand it. There are a couple of very specific topics that I've studied and researched for decades. When I have discuss to those topics with people who have other specialties, and let them have input and make decisions that are within my realm of expertise but not theirs, it can be very frustrating. Because Linus is the expert on the Linux kernel, and he's a perfectionist, I understand it may get very frustrating to continually deal with mistakes that are, to him, stupid mistakes.

  15. People make mistakes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    People make mistakes. People especially make mistakes in a code-base as complicated and involved as the Linux kernel. I'm sure Linus tries to pick up on everything he can before giving a kernel final approval, but sometimes things slip through. It happens, it's just the nature of the beast.

    What you DON'T do is slag off a developer in public for a mistake. Mistakes are critical learning tools, something that we allow children to make because we know of the benefit mistakes have for education, but something we punish adults for doing, as if things are any different once you're older. In any case, given the fact that kernel developers are often (but not always) volunteers, it strikes me as incredibly toxic to strike down your workers in public, especially since they can all just choose to walk away if they are tired of dealing with Linus' shit.

    I also wonder how many people choose not to even try to contribute to the kernel given his polarizing personality. People say the Linux kernel is a great success story and that Linus' style of management must be working. I wonder how much better it'd work if he just treated the people actually building his fucking kernel with a bit more respect. I don't give a shit if being Finish somehow means you can be blunt because that's part of the Fins "culture" - that doesn't excuse you from basic human decency.

    1. Re:People make mistakes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my opinion Linus has improved by criticizing Andrew for merging a patch with BUG_ON instead of criticizing Hannes for posting a buggy patch.
      If I was Hannes, I'd feel really bad right now.

    2. Re:People make mistakes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mistakes are critical learning tools

      There are different categories of mistakes. Over-tightening a bolt? Grab a new one. Using an acetylene torch to cut open a full fuel tank? You'll be out of a job as soon as the fire department is done putting out the fire.

      This one was of the latter kind, by someone who is supposed to be the safety inspector.

  16. Poor tact but right reaction by somenickname · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Linus isn't likely to invite you out for an ice cream cone to discuss a bug and your feelings about it but, he's right that it's a pretty bad bug (http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1610.0/00878.html). Luckily, the way kernel development works means that 99.9999% of users will never see this bug. No major distro has shipped this yet and by the time this kernel trickles down to users (if ever), the bug will be fixed.

    1. Re:Poor tact but right reaction by rubycodez · · Score: 3, Informative

      those kind of people that think they have to have the latest kernel are so amusing though, bleeding edge often means you'll bleed

    2. Re:Poor tact but right reaction by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      I don't really like when people complain about someone specifically and mention his/her name. But the bug is bad and Linus is right about that. The kernel is the most complicated thing in the OS, by far. And there is a reason we all benefit from an open source kernel of that amazing quality, made by developers all around the world on their free time, and that's thanks to Linus's strict management.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    3. Re: Poor tact but right reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > most complicated

      service systemd start

      SYSTEMD IS ON THE CASE

    4. Re:Poor tact but right reaction by phorm · · Score: 1

      I might have been a victim of this but for the fact that I ran out of space when compiling 4.8 last night.
      Saved by the small SSD :-)

    5. Re:Poor tact but right reaction by phorm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      4.8 isn't just the newest kernel, it was also just recently earmarked as the newest *stable* kernel.
      For myself, I've got a newer AMD card for which a newer 4.7.6+ kernel is required in order to get proper/full functionality from the built-in AMDGPU module. I was actually on my way to install 4.8 last night but ran into some space issues because I forgot to disable a bunch of modules I don't use (damn those things get big now).

    6. Re:Poor tact but right reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah. It's still a project manager deflecting blame and throwing an employee under the bus. If this was a corporation, everyone would view it as an asshole boss. But since it's Linus and Linux, it's "ha! got 'em!"

    7. Re:Poor tact but right reaction by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Except Linus didn't do that, you ignorant, and likely illiterate, shit head.

    8. Re:Poor tact but right reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It always means you bleed, that is where the expression comes from.
      Cutting edge is the latest that works. Bleeding edge is the development that takes all the risks and costs.
      Some people misuse bleeding edge to make it sound like have fresher stuff than the competition, but usually it just means that they have the same old but haven't fixed their bugs yet.

      If you want stuff that works you should probably stay away from people that uses either of the expressions.

    9. Re:Poor tact but right reaction by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      What card is that? My RX 480 works flawless with 4.7.4 and mesa-git

    10. Re:Poor tact but right reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And most people realize that they chose bleeding edge and are fine with the occasional bleeding. I have no issue with it, I can always go back to an older one if necessary. No big deal.

    11. Re:Poor tact but right reaction by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      you don't do anything serious with your systems then

    12. Re:Poor tact but right reaction by phorm · · Score: 1

      It is an RX480.I might be a bit off on my minor version numbering. I know it requires at least a 4.7.x but I 4.7.6 was the latest stable and IIRC there were bugs in the early 4.7 kernels too (probably fixed around 4.7.2 or 4.7.4)

      Right now I'm using 4.7.6 and some of the updated Xorg/DRI/etc packages supplied with the AMDGPU download from AMD's site. However the highest kernel on Ubuntu/Mint was a 4.4 series so either way I had to download/build one from source, in which case going with the latest "stable" seemed the best choice at the time.

    13. Re:Poor tact but right reaction by phorm · · Score: 1

      BTW, what did you need mesa-git for?

      I think you might be OK using just the packages from here, and they also provide some info on getting Vulkan up and running.

    14. Re:Poor tact but right reaction by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      mesa have been updated like hell during this last year so the version in most repos (I'm on Ubuntu and the latest mesa in their repo is 11.2 while mesa-git is 12.x and with 11.2 there where no support for the RX480 since all the new AMD open source drivers have been put into the 12.x branch. The AMDGPU-PRO which is their closed driver might work ok but I run their fully open stack. My daughter plays Life is Strange and that game requires mesa 12.x (it does not work with AMDGPU-PRO) which is why I went this route.

  17. Documentation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was looking at tainted kernels a few days ago and was directed to a newsgroup post from 2003 which is apparently *the* documentation so I think people should be forgiven for somehow missing a post from 2002. Really Linus, if you will leave your stuff strewn about like this, you have only yourself to blame.

  18. I think Linus is right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Specially if something was discussed that long ago.

    OTOH, being right is not always the best thing -- and particularly being technically right is not any better... just two words for Linus:

    Alan Cox.

    I think a good workaround would be releasing 4.9 ASAP... also, sorry if this is uncalled for, but there's no I in team. If a coworker makes a mistake, we did a mistake.

  19. Not apoligizing by Dan+East · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He's not apologizing. Saying "I'm sorry blank blank blank" doesn't constitute an apology.

    I'm really sorry I applied that last series from Andrew

    That's not an apology. That's saying he's disappointed someone screwed up, and he named that person to direct the blame towards that person. No dev team I've ever been on would throw someone under the bus like that. We would take responsibility as a team. He might as well say "I'm sorry Andrew sucks as a developer and is so incompetent", because that is no less an apology than what he actually did say.

    Now had he said "I'm really sorry I didn't do my job and I didn't properly test contributions, and as the gatekeeper to what code becomes official, I take full responsibility for the bug and I'm taking actions to do my job better in the future", well, that would be an apology.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Not apoligizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hmm, Andrew Morton is one of the two most trusted kernel developers, the other one being Al Viro. These two get absolutely no kiddie gloves from Linus when they do something they really, really, *really* ought to know better. OTOH, he pretty much merges anything these two send to him blindly on trust, *even when he is less than one week away from shipping it as a stable kernel*.

      Does that make it a bit more clear?

      And, believe me, these two get one or two rants like that at most once every 15 years. They are *that* good, and every single kernel developer worth something *knows* it. They get that level of rant with names included, because it is the other side of getting that level of trust out of Linus. Linus pretty much trusts Andrew Morton to be Linus himself.

      And actually, so does everyone else [in the Linux kernel *upstream* community], as far as I know. So, yeah.

    2. Re:Not apoligizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hmm, and I should add, out of the two (Al Viro and Andrew Morton), only Andrew works as a "can send patches for *any* kernel subsystem" merge lieutenant. Al Viro is the VFS-layer mastermind, and usually stays away from anything else.

    3. Re:Not apoligizing by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's not an apology. That's saying he's disappointed someone screwed up, and he named that person to direct the blame towards that person. No dev team I've ever been on would throw someone under the bus like that. We would take responsibility as a team. He might as well say "I'm sorry Andrew sucks as a developer and is so incompetent", because that is no less an apology than what he actually did say.

      He's absolutely not apologizing to Andrew, he's apologizing to the end users. This release is below the standard of quality he wants for the Linux kernel and he's not shy about naming and shaming those responsible. And that includes Linus himself for not catching the offending code and for running the project in a way that let it happen, that much is sincere. But he's not there to give moral support, he's there more like a drill sergeant or elite coach. They are not there to cuddle you, they're there to find the people who can excel and turn them into disciplined, highly skilled specialists. Pushing people to their limits, pointing out their flaws, have them try over and over again, always strive for them to do better isn't how you make friends. Usually you end up with a few gold nuggets and a lot of people who hate your guts. It's a lot easier to say "Looks fine to me, good work let's go have some beers" instead, but that's also how you not end up with the Linux kernel.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:Not apoligizing by somenickname · · Score: 3, Informative

      He's not apologizing. Saying "I'm sorry blank blank blank" doesn't constitute an apology.

      What makes you think he was trying to apologize? He's highly irritated that one of his closest generals let something bad through. He reacted in normal Linus fashion but, I don't think you could get to where Andrew Morton is without being familiar with what Linus expects and how he reacts when his expectations aren't met. You have to have really, really thick skin to work at that level.

      So, yeah, it wasn't polite. But, if you've ever worked at the higher levels of a big company, "polite" isn't even vaguely a consideration. The only reason that Linus rants make Slashdot news is because they happen in public. At any other company, a person in Andrew Mortons position is likely to be verbally berated but, it all happens behind closed doors.

      If anything, in this case, people familiar with Andrew Morton probably find it slightly amusing that a Jedi Master can make mistakes too.

      If I remember right, Andrew Morton has a Slashdot account so, maybe he can chime in.

    5. Re:Not apoligizing by DeVilla · · Score: 1

      No doubt Andrew has to have thick skin, but personally I think tearing into him just isn't cool.

    6. Re:Not apoligizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > What makes you think he was trying to apologize?
      The first line in the summary maybe?

    7. Re:Not apoligizing by somenickname · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's cool as in, "Woohoo! Let's break out the popcorn and watch this guy burn at the stake!" but, it's the way the project is run. And, based on the fact that it's probably the most used single piece of software on the planet, I think you have to give a little leeway to the leadership and the devotion to perfection. Especially since, as I said, part of the reason Linus seems like a tyrant is that his business gets aired on public mailing lists as opposed to closed corporate e-mail accounts. He probably looks like a saint compared to your average CEO.

    8. Re:Not apoligizing by DeVilla · · Score: 1

      I get all that. I'm talking about Andrew specifically. Linus isn't wailing on some stooge he hardly knows or someone with a reputation for generating crap.

    9. Re:Not apoligizing by somenickname · · Score: 1

      True. And, I can see your point. But, at the same time, it's well known that Linus behaves like this. Giving a pass to your right hand man *because* he's your right hand man is probably bad for the project. It's like saying, "Everyone who does something stupid will be called out. Except Andrew. I will just gloss over that".

    10. Re:Not apoligizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny. Are you part of a dev team that is the size and scope, and has as a comparable diverse developer base as the Linux Kernel?

      Thought not...

    11. Re:Not apoligizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looking at it from the outside, it's actually Linus who made the worse errors. First, it's his job to make sure that no untested code ends up in stable. Second, if this BUG_ON thing is so bad, it was his job to communicate this more effectively and maybe have a better process in place to make sure abuse doesn't slip in the kernel. But no, he saw it but Linus chose not to act on it.
      And now when the shit hit the fan, Linus is suddenly all ‘it's all his fault’ even though he okayed the code knowing what was in it and was in no different of a position than Andrew. Linus has the attitude of whiny three-year old, immediately trying to shift the blame. At this point I no longer really care whether Andrew screwed up or not, and I don't understand why Linus hasn't long ago been crucified for his behaviour. I don't care how technically competent he is; the damage he's done to the community far outweighs that by now.

    12. Re:Not apoligizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree. As a manager of a project it is his main responsibility to know who of his reports can be trusted to do what. It's his responsibility to enable or prevent things from happening. He failed in that and he is acknowledging it.

    13. Re:Not apoligizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first line in the summary maybe?

      The first words of it, maybe. But if you read the whole thing, it's different. Of course, that requires sufficient attention span, the ability to read, and some form of comprehension capacity.

    14. Re:Not apoligizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is exactly OPs point. The first sentence said he's apologizing.
      Then he goes on to not apologize.
      I think you are the one who should learn to read.

    15. Re:Not apoligizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No he is not. He is passive-aggressively shifting the blame onto Andrew Morton. Whether that is justified or not may be debatable, but it is nevertheless the case that it is NOT an apology.

    16. Re:Not apoligizing by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      Andrew might actually appreciate the rant believe it or not. Given a rant from Linus means that you provide something of great value to him and that you have an opportunity to improve. In organisations where things like this gets swept under the rug you one day wake up realising that you have stalled in your performance and are no longer relevant. It would have been a completely different thing if Linus has given him a rant on a regular basis like how supposedly Bill Gates management style was.

    17. Re:Not apoligizing by brantondaveperson · · Score: 0

      You have to have really, really thick skin to work at that level.

      Why? I should have thought that you need to be highly technically skilled, and be able to take constructive criticism when it's justified. Why you would need a 'really really really' thick skin to work on an operating system kernel is a bit beyond me.

      Oh, that's right. It's Saint Linus. He gets to say what he wants to people.... why again? There are other OSs out there, with rather better designed kernels, that appear to be run perfectly well without this public naming-and-shaming that Linux seems to get off on.

      There's no excuse for it. He's a bully. And I doubt very much in Andrew Morton would dare to chime in once Linus has spoken.

    18. Re:Not apoligizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is exactly OPs point. The first sentence said he's apologizing.

      Which is exactly the actual point (not OP's): Read the whole thing before you jump to conclusions. I know that's difficult for the resident haters of Linus, but at least try.

      Then he goes on to not apologize.

      Except he does apologize: To the recipients of the now-less-than-optimal kernel release. He doesn't apologize to Andrew. Why would he? Linus apologizes to the recipients, as he should. Linus fucked up, letting the bad code through. He doesn't apologize to Andrew. Andrew fucked up, submitting the bad code in the first place. Andrew will take the hint and not repeat it. Linus will be more careful about this specific piece of code in the future. They will shake hands and carry on working. Mission accomplished.

      I think you are the one who should learn to read.

      No, it's still you.

    19. Re:Not apoligizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, Linus is well known for harsher treatment for mistakes the more he trusts you.

      From the sounds of it, there isn't anyone he trusts more than Andrew, thus big mistakes get a full on rant.

    20. Re: Not apoligizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Grow the fuck up you little snowflake. Jesus Christ you are soft. Worst than baby shit.

    21. Re:Not apoligizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VFS is a big one, though, and extremely high risk (data corruption is the worst thing that can happen).

  20. Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I've ranted against people using BUG_ON() for debugging in the past. Why the f*ck does this still happen?"

    Of course it still happens. Rants aren't documentation, rants don't fix things. If BUG_ON() is an issue than its documentation should be updated with its proper usage and/or the feature removed. If those things aren't possible, then whatever accepts patches or statically analyses the code should report all BUG_ON() uses.

    Since when did rants matter outside of PR echo chambers? The developer shouldn't be expected to read through anything except the documentation. If that's not good enough to do things properly, then the documentation is at fault not the developer.

    1. Re:Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gee, you mean Linus might actually be partly responsible for this?

      You obviously haven't had the privilege of dealing with His Majesty .... He can do no wrong....

    2. Re:Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No need to update the documentation. Nobody reads the comments when using a macro like BUG_ON.
      You see it somewhere in old code and think that it is exactly what you need right now.

      The first step is to make checkpatch.pl complain when BUG_ON is added in a patch.
      Then people have to defend their use of BUG_ON when they post the patch.

    3. Re:Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, there is already a big comment explaining the proper use of BUG_ON in asm-generic/bug.h and checkpatch.pl already does frown upon BUG_ON since September 2015.

  21. Re:"there is NO EXCUSE to knowingly kill the kerne by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually Linus, there is a good excuse - when the failing of a logic assertion could silently lead to behavior that is worse than a kernel halt, specifically data corruption.

    +2 Redundant currently, you've angered the fanboys, lol.

  22. This BUG_ON thing .... by King_TJ · · Score: 5, Informative

    As I'm not a developer, I had to read through some of the comments left to the original stories to figure out what the fuss was all about.

    Maybe most Slashdot readers are more focused than I am on coding and already know all of this. But what I learned is that essentially, sticking this BUG_ON line someplace in the code causes Linux to do the equivalent of a Windows blue screen of death when it hits it. It's a purposeful way to cause an instant system halt because you believe the software should never reach that spot in the code, and if it does, you're worried that data corruption will result -- so better to halt things than let that happen.

    It sounds like even back in 2002 though, Linus was expressing his dislike for using it and recommended a WARN_ON alternative that would just alert people to the issue but let things continue.

    The thing is? I'm not entirely sure Linus's anger is warranted here? It sounds like basically, he's of the philosophy that "the code must go on". In other words, it's almost always better to keep the system running, despite any bugs, than to kernel panic and stop the whole thing. Perhaps in a world of virtual machines and servers running a whole slew of different processes at the same time, there's logic to this? (EG. If one of your boxes is needed to perform DNS, DHCP and/or other basic functions for a whole network -- you'd probably rather it keep doing those things, even if a bug is hit that means a process reading/writing data to files someplace else gets a critical error that could corrupt records in a database or improperly truncate some other file it was working with.)

    BUT .... this could just as easily be subjective, based on where the bug lies and what it impacts, vs. what YOU consider a mission critical use of the machine in question. If BUG_ON saves data from loss, maybe that really is better for SOME users than letting it go on generating/logging warnings that people aren't going to notice right away?

    I get the idea Linus leans the direction he does on this issue mainly because he wants any kernel he approves as "stable" to have that appearance, buggy or not.

    1. Re:This BUG_ON thing .... by jandrese · · Score: 1

      A better solution might be to default to WARN_ON, but have a knob in the kernel that makes warnings fatal for people who can't afford the possibility of data corruption (Linux is probably the wrong kernel for people with that critical of a need, but there probably isn't a right choice).

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    2. Re:This BUG_ON thing .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      with all your opining I figured you might keep me from having to RTFA- is this just some driver I'll never use and most people never need to have configured into their kernel, or is it something that would bite some significant percentage of all 4.8 kernel users?

    3. Re:This BUG_ON thing .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it was mentioned elsewhere that Linus accepts BUG_ON() or something like it when you need to prevent data corruption. However, I believe that the particular BUG_ON()s that were part of this rant were not in that situation. Rather, they were called on recoverable error conditions, probably as part of the debugging process, and they somehow ended up in a non-debugging production kernel somewhere.

      If you compile your own kernel, you notice tons of configuration flags that enable debugging features, like this sort of thing.

    4. Re:This BUG_ON thing .... by complete+loony · · Score: 3, Informative

      This pre-existing bug was at worst a rare memory leak. Something that most systems could ignore for a very long time before it became a problem. Logging a warning & letting the memory leak happen is bearable in this case.

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    5. Re:This BUG_ON thing .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      BUT .... this could just as easily be subjective, based on where the bug lies and what it impacts, vs. what YOU consider a mission critical use of the machine in question. If BUG_ON saves data from loss, maybe that really is better for SOME users than letting it go on generating/logging warnings that people aren't going to notice right away?

      That's precisely it! IF BUG_ON saves data from loss, that's great. If BUG_ON CAUSES data loss by halting on a recoverable situation without any reasonably belief it'll cause data corruption, you're making the situation worse. That's precisely why Linus was upset about. End of story.

    6. Re:This BUG_ON thing .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sticking this BUG_ON line someplace in the code causes Linux to do the equivalent of a Windows blue screen of death when it hits it. It's a purposeful way to cause an instant system halt because you believe the software should never reach that spot in the code, and if it does, you're worried that data corruption will result -- so better to halt things than let that happen.

      Yeah and it's perfectly fine to use it in such a context, but in the present case, the error *is* recoverable and BUG_ON should never ever have been used. A rant ensued.

    7. Re:This BUG_ON thing .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think part of the problem is calling it BUG_ON() when it should be called PANIC() or DIE_ON() or OMGWTFBBQ()...

  23. Maybe people do not sift... by MoarSauce123 · · Score: 0

    ....through 15 years of shit posts on mailing lists. If I'd be at the receiving end of Torvald's rampant verbal abuse I'd submit crap code as well just to piss him off. Maybe Torvalds is just a crappy project leader who first lets buggy shit through and then blames everyone else for it.

    1. Re:Maybe people do not sift... by somenickname · · Score: 2

      If you'd been at the end of "Torvald's rampant verbal abuse" for 15 years, you'd have been banned from submitting to the kernel about 14.5 years ago. So, really, it wouldn't be an issue.

    2. Re:Maybe people do not sift... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe Torvalds is just a crappy project leader

      He is leading the most complex and arguably most successful software project in the world.
      He also didn't just inherit the position because of nepotism or rich friends, he has led it from the start to now.

      If you argue that Torvalds is a crappy project leader then your knowledge is not only completely theoretical but also very likely wrong.
      You are essentially claiming that the Earth is flat and the Moon landing didn't happen.
      I can just look at all the Linux devices out there and see that Torvalds is a very skilled project leader. He gets shit done, even if you don't like his methods.

    3. Re:Maybe people do not sift... by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      He is leading the most complex and arguably most successful software project in the world.

      The Linux Kernel is very far from being the most complex software project in the world.

    4. Re: Maybe people do not sift... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is then snowflake? You seem to be a Linux/Linus hater. So why not tell us?

      Oh you can't because you are so butt hurt by Linux/Linux that it clouds your judgement so you are just spouting off shit. Fucking precious snowflake. Softer than babyshit.

  24. lol... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...well, HE committed the changes and released before checking everything.

    no one to blame but himself

    1. Re: lol... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if you read you would see that he acknowledged this. But you didn't. You saw the parts you wanted to see, and quietly ignored the rest.

  25. You Tell'em Linus. by zenlessyank · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Buncha snowflakes and pop-tarts can't handle some feedback with a few 'fucks' thrown in??

    You are in the wrong damn career. Computers and their software WAS BUILT with profanity. It is part of the culture.It is just like the military. Wars are won with profanity and murder.

    If you don't want to hear it then go teach preschoolers how to color.

    1. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by somenickname · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'd revoke all my posts in this thread to mark this up...

    2. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      seriously? every endeavor should be treated like it's a military action? i've been coding professionally for 20+ years and i've never once had to use profanity or murder to accomplish my goals or get a teammate to accomplish theirs. it's not part of the culture, never was. it alienates teammates and it's counterproductive. linus can do what he wants because it's his kernel, but no serious professional should ever take their cues from him.

    3. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by guruevi · · Score: 3, Funny

      But it's so anti-feminine to use curse words. It turns women away from computer engineering.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    4. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      Really? Most programmers I know take pride in their ability to converse calmly and rationally about the problems at hand, without letting their emotions or their egos get the better of them.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    5. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by zenlessyank · · Score: 1

      There are lies and there are DAMN lies.

    6. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      i've been coding professionally for 20+ years and i've never once had to use profanity or murder to accomplish my goals [...]

      Then you have weak goals. My goal is "World Domination" and I'll swear at or kill anyone who gets in my way. That's how things get done, Mister!

      (Yes, I'm being facetious.)

    7. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by somenickname · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Calm and rational discussion should be the norm, absolutely. No one argues with that. But, when someone fucks up, you don't hand them a lollipop and reassuringly pet their head.

    8. Re: You Tell'em Linus. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it also makes people think you're nothing but a foul-mouthed cunt.

    9. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with that sentiment is that you unnecessarily narrow the talent pool.
      What useful purpose does it serve to have Linus chew out someone else and point the finger at him, for an issue which was in part caused by Linus and for which Linus was the end responsible?
      Most intelligent, capable coders with a willingness to contribute to society tend to be kind-hearted, fair people, who in turn really don't like to be treated like shit. We're limiting our talent pool to people who are less suited for the job and why? Just to indulge Linus' ‘need’ to be a twat.

    10. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Calm and rational discussion should be the norm, absolutely. No one argues with that. But, when someone fucks up, you don't hand them a lollipop and reassuringly pet their head.

      Those aren't the only two options. You are acting as if the only two options are "lollipops and pettings" and "berate them in public". You can berate them in private, and firmly (but politely) mark them down in public.

      No one here advocated treating them with kid gloves.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    11. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? Most programmers I know take pride in their ability to converse calmly and rationally about the problems at hand, without letting their emotions or their egos get the better of them.

      That's because: they don't have to deal with your code; visual basic programmers are a different breed.

    12. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by gweihir · · Score: 1

      But then, most programmers (in fact all of them except for one) have not built the Linux kernel from scratch and are not not maintaining it.

      And what is this whimpyness about a bit of clear language? PC does not get engineering done. Pretending mistakes are not serious kills engineering.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    13. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      This is Linux and LKML, nothing is done in private. All conversations and development is done in public. And I have yet to see Linus rant against "new unknown guy" unless said person have really really fucked up beyond repair (I somehow recall a situation some years ago where an individual was trying to get in a patch in order to get "Linux Kernel developer" in his CV so he submitted bad patch after bad patch until Linus lost it), he only rants at people who both can take it and that should know better.

    14. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      This is Linux and LKML, nothing is done in private. All conversations and development is done in public. And I have yet to see Linus rant against "new unknown guy" unless said person have really really fucked up beyond repair (I somehow recall a situation some years ago where an individual was trying to get in a patch in order to get "Linux Kernel developer" in his CV so he submitted bad patch after bad patch until Linus lost it), he only rants at people who both can take it and that should know better.

      I agree with everything you posted; I was just pointing out that the GP presented a false dichotomy: that the only options were "lollipops" or "profanity'. This is clearly not true. There are options besides treating someone like a special snowflake and handing them lollipops.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    15. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      Yeah the GP stance of lollipops vs profanity was indeed strange.

    16. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not the ones I know.

    17. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe profanity is a US or Anglo-Saxon thing rather than a computer thing?

      In 20 years as a developer and SW specialist I was never involved in a discussion with profanity. But maybe that was because the company was full of people with a professional "we'll do/fix this" attitude.

    18. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by erapert · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Linus is mah nigga.

    19. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh look, it's one of the snowflakes.

    20. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      And what is this whimpyness about a bit of clear language? PC does not get engineering done. Pretending mistakes are not serious kills engineering.

      Well I don't know, some people really like to pass the buck instead of admitting that their failures or the failures of their peers have screwed over hundreds of millions of people.

      And as for PC language, hell, I've even seen people whine that you're "stalking" them if you mention that you're going to double-check their claims.

    21. Re:You Tell'em Linus. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah the GP was indeed strange.

      FTFY

  26. Re:Everyone is a moron to someone.... by lgw · · Score: 1

    Come down off your thrown jerk-face

    How would you throw a jerk-face, and why would you stand on one?

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  27. Re:"there is NO EXCUSE to knowingly kill the kerne by lgw · · Score: 1

    Sure, but maybe BUG_ON isn't the best way to express that? Heck, what is the standard in the Linux kernel for "crash immediately".

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  28. Testing testing testing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux still doesn't have a proper test suite.
    If they did, maybe they would have caught this.
    Also, Linus has no one to blame but himself.
    Why did he knowingly accept a broken patch?
    And if he didn't see it was broken, why is he yelling at someone else for not seeing the same thing?
    What an idiot.

    1. Re:Testing testing testing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have the time to test every function in the kernel with every possible value as an input?

      You are going to personally read every line of code that gets submitted? And take the time to understand what it interacts with and how?

      Those tasks are all delegated to experts for each kernel subsystem, and Andrew was the expert who accepted the bad code.

      As head of the project, Linus is responsible for things that happen underneath him. And that means identifying the problem publicly so it can be (A) fixed and (B) not repeated.

  29. Move to BSD by unixisc · · Score: 1

    So that I can live a lifetime where I never make a mistake and everyone in the world is a moron compared to me.

    Maybe Linus can vote w/ his feet and switch to either FreeBSD or Minix

  30. Re:Everyone is a moron to someone.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. People were writing new code which was shit. That code needs to be rewritten. We shouldn't marginalise the Linux kernal so that shit code can make it in. Why would you want crappy code in the Linux kernal? What are you, a microsoft shill?

  31. Re:That's why it's called Linsux by Eristone · · Score: 3, Funny

    Dangit gotta warn me when you are posting... now I'm going to have to replace the troll detector again. And two rooms of the house where it was sitting .. and a cat.

  32. Improved feelings of self-worth by MountainLogic · · Score: 1

    So, as the same reason many folks have kids is the same reason they contribute to an open source protect: To improve their feelings of self-worth. And the result may be the same in both cases.

  33. Re: That's why it's called Linsux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So epic you should:
    A) Jump off a tall building
    B) Fix the 1 million plus bugs of Win 10
    C) Go rob a Kardashian

  34. Asshole genius by ecorona · · Score: 1

    Ok, Linus sounds like a total asshole with no iota of social grace, but the dude is a freaking genius. This more than offsets his negatives. Think of all the assholes walking around out there who don't do jack for society. I actually fear for Linus. If anything ever happened to him, people like Andrew are going to make so that the linux codebase gradually descends into chaos. I can already see the memes (hopefully many years from now) with Linux saying "miss me?" and smiling while beating an inferior programmer with his old man cane.

    1. Re:Asshole genius by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe if something happens to linus someone with half a brain will take over and as a first step implement proper testing procedures.

    2. Re:Asshole genius by DeVilla · · Score: 2

      Did I miss something? Is Andrew really that bad? He let a bug through here, but I remember him being one of the good ones.

    3. Re:Asshole genius by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, Linus hasn't been writing kernel code for more than a decade. He has just been managing other people's patches. Andrew is one of the guys trying to make fixes and do the actual work. Yeah, so the guy messed up. And, Linus is a dick about it. That has been his modus operandi for a long time. Not sure this makes Linus a genius, though. He is smarter than the average bear.

    4. Re:Asshole genius by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      Andres is one of the best there is which is also why he got that Linus-rant.

    5. Re:Asshole genius by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, exactly! That's why I beat my wife, the love of my life, whenever she disappoints me! Because she has to have a tough skin to be married to me, and besides, I'm that good. I mean, there's no more effective corrective action than abuse, is there?

    6. Re:Asshole genius by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      Of course, because being slightly rude in a public mail list is equal to you physically abusing your wife. Congrats on the massive fail in logic!

    7. Re:Asshole genius by DeVilla · · Score: 1
      Not following you. I was commenting on ecorona's comment

      If anything ever happened to him, people like Andrew are going to make so that the linux codebase gradually descends into chaos.

      One bug (though Linus tantrum inducing) doesn't necessarily make him the downfall of the kernel, I wouldn't think. I'll admit I'm not trying to employ deep logic here.

    8. Re:Asshole genius by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      And I was replying to the AC above me, perhaps you missed that one? (could be filtered out in your settings).

    9. Re:Asshole genius by DeVilla · · Score: 1

      Yep. Sorry. The AC's comment was hidden in the threaded view and looked like you were following up yourself.

  35. Re:Everyone is a moron to someone.... by bheerssen · · Score: 1

    1) By the belt and collar
    2) To celebrate your victory

    --
    (Score: -1, Stupid)
  36. Re: Everyone is a moron to someone.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Just a guess, but you are a coding god, and everyone else, well...

  37. Re:He is almost 50! by Gibgezr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ya, all those young programmers that don't know about 15 year old discussions on the use of the BUG_ON macro etc., so they keep re-inventing the square wheel...that'll fix things!

    Sometimes AC's say the stupidest shit.

  38. Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ever heard of staging vs production. Hmm, what about testing. Oh that's right, this is Linux, into the blender and full speed on.

    1. Re:Amateurs by somenickname · · Score: 1

      When a kernel is released, it's *very* unlikely that it will see any use in a major distribution for 6 months to a year. And, by that time, it will be several revisions beyond the initial release. How does that compare to your dev/staging/production environment?

      Thought so...

  39. Hey Linus maybe it's time for a MicroKernel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fault isolation takes care of most of these kinds of bugs especially it you combine them with Erlang like self healing supervisors. But first for that to be at all possible we need a micro Kernel or at least some sort of compromise as to what goes into the critical section of the operating system (what JLOUIS calls the error kernel, google it).

    In other words move some stuff out of kernel space already! We don't need so much code to be running in kernel mode.

    1. Re:Hey Linus maybe it's time for a MicroKernel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. We can always put more shit on systemd.

    2. Re:Hey Linus maybe it's time for a MicroKernel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll take a segfault over a kernel panic any day.

  40. Re:"there is NO EXCUSE to knowingly kill the kerne by c · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you actually read the thread, that's basically where he says it's appropriate, and only then.

    The problem appears to be that people are using that feature in situations where recovery is feasible and desirable, or they're using it under the assumption that it only impacts people running special development kernels.

    --
    Log in or piss off.
  41. Re:He is almost 50! by somenickname · · Score: 4, Informative

    I understand that this is a troll post but, it still makes me laugh. Software guys over the age of 40 are a pain in the ass to work with because they've seen so much idiocy over their careers that they can spot it immediately and point it out. If you are in your 20s and working with other people in their 20s, the echo chamber you live in is certainly re-affirming but, not particularly conducive to writing good software.

  42. Re:"there is NO EXCUSE to knowingly kill the kerne by JoeyRox · · Score: 2

    I guess this quote from Linus threw me off:

    "I should have reacted to the damn added BUG_ON() lines. I suspect I will have to finally just remove the idiotic BUG_ON() concept once and for all, because there is NO F*CKING EXCUSE to knowingly kill the kernel."

  43. Oh well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck it. Revert 4.8 and do a 4.8-rc9.

  44. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't think the problem is that everyone else is a moron (though there are a lot of them to be sure), it's that everyone else has a different plan, agenda, goal, technique. So one person who lives and breathes the code is annoyed at other people who may want to get home early, are new to the code, are under a lot of pressure to get it done fast, and so forth. At the work place, should you accuse the employee of being incompetent at the task, or blame the manager for assigning a person without the necessary skills and experience to that task?

  45. Re:Everyone is a moron to someone.... by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's some good stuff in Linux. But damn it's an unreadable mess in so many places. I like looking at BSD based code because it is so often much more straight forward and easier to understand.

    So where in the open source world are there regular code reviews with thought out discussions about how to write code better, how to follow the correct style guidelines, pointing out "oh by the way, you're using BUG_ON() the wrong way", and stuff like that?

  46. Re:Everyone is a moron to someone.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, I just called out Linus. Come down off your thrown jerk-face, and fix your sloppy design. Coders who don't know Linux as well as you do shouldn't get tripped up by this sort of thing.

    Andrew Morton has been a Linux kernel developer for more than a decade. He should know the proper way to use the development tools including BUG_ON() given Linus' previous message about the correct way to use the feature. There are plenty of other issues with the kernel source code though, not the least of which are all the warnings about unused variables - if they are no used, remove them or declare them properly if they should be externals or some such.

  47. Re:Everyone is a moron to someone.... by Space+cowboy · · Score: 1

    I've been coding for about 30 years now, a bit longer actually. Something that's become apparent over the years is that there ought to be a law of conservation of complexity. You can abstract and then re-abstract, you can use well-known design patterns, you can write defensively, and you can document until the cows come home. All of these help, they help by spreading out the complexity onto a larger surface - it becomes less opaque as it gets "thinner", the more it spreads out.

    However, it remains the case that some things are just inherently complex, that understanding them, or their particular interfaces and parameters, requires the understanding of the system as a whole, not the parts in isolation. Sometimes divide does not conquer, at least in the real world. There's not *many* problems like this, and I've no idea if this is the sort of thing Linus is referring to - I don't keep up with the Linux kernel these days, but there may be a good reason why he's done what he's done. You "calling him out" without explicit reasons why, or (better) giving a superior approach than what is already there is just showing ignorance, IMHO.

    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
  48. Re:Everyone is a moron to someone.... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2

    "Clearly his code needs to be rewritten then. If people use your code for a decade and a half, and there are still problems after all that time with employing it correctly, who is at fault? "

    Well mostly people who are too ignorant about software development to know that there is no such thing as a significant codebase in which that isn't the case. Clearly you have no software development skills or experience. Off you go ....

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  49. Re: You really don't. Dealing with morons is frust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like that he's an asshole. In this case (and a non-trivial amount of cases), he's an asshole because he's above the mean by a serious degree, and has determined what gets the best results in terms of his own attitude and his dealings with others (whether consciously or unconsciously).

    Obviously, lamers spoof this by being an asshole with no legit backing. But the only thing Torvalds ever got wrong was when he hoped that his first flamefest against AST was also his last. He's needed to bring out the flamethrower plenty.

  50. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by dbIII · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I do excuse it.
    He is attacking the mistake of the person and not the person.
    Taking such stuff personally is ridiculous, but I suppose it does give people something to talk about with something that's almost a non-issue.

  51. Re:Or attempting to derail threads Trump-style by HBI · · Score: 1

    Must've struck a nerve there. Facing up to the reality of your life is hard...

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  52. A strange story by rewardian · · Score: 2

    1.) Andrew Morton was the maintainer that published the commit, but Johannes Weiner pushed the fix. Almost no one mentions this. 2.) Point #1 doesn't really matter. Who cares about who did what. 3.) A relatively and surprisingly cool Linus comments on something that's been bugging him. It's almost pub talk except kernel developers. I wish I could've created a more cogent proof or argument, but really, non-news. Kernel developers discuss an issue resolved slightly later than ideal. Linus loves his beautiful artifact and wants to address anything that may mar it (which almost every article on this mailing list thread has overblown). I'd like to think everyone on that list is nearly as interested as he.

    1. Re:A strange story by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      Well point #1 does matter because it does show to the uninformed public that Linus does not rant at Johannes Weiner for creating the patch but rants at Andrew Morton who approved of the patch and is the one that should know better than that.

  53. Happens with the older guys too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some might think that, but there are plenty of older programmers who still make these mistakes. Thankfully, in my experience they often get straightened out by their peers, or old sysadmins.

    Just a few days I had to recommend a polite email that basically said "WTF would you even consider recommending this" for an admin dealing with a programmer who decided to favor expediency over good practice (aka circumventing security/integrity).

    Thankfully he at least *asked* before he tried his workaround. It wouldn't have worked anyhow with our server/security settings, but it would have failed miserably and cause issues if he had tried. Guy is a fair bit older than me, and I've far from 20.

    Posting anon because I still work there.

    1. Re:Happens with the older guys too by somenickname · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sure, an ideal software team is basically:

      - 1-2 grumpy old guys who are mostly just trying to steer the project away from disaster.
      - A couple guys a bit younger than that who are less jaded than the grumpy old guys but, kinda get where they are coming from and so genuinely think about the code they are writing.
      - A couple of young guys that just finished a C++ book and enthusiastically want to use templates everywhere.

      That's a software team that can get shit done. And, probably won't be using the excuse of "refactoring" to rewrite it in six months.

    2. Re:Happens with the older guys too by Cesare+Ferrari · · Score: 1

      Indeed, a successful model. The right team mix with the right level of experience and enthusiasm can really churn through the work and get stuff sorted. Team of 8 where I am - 4 under 25, 2 mid 30s, two over 45. The trick is to understand what everyone brings to the team (invariably different skills), and to totally ignore upper managements belief that everyone is equally capable and interested in tackling every problem (you're all developers right?).

  54. Ps I AM the moron kernel contributor by raymorris · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Btw, I *am* the moron in kernel dev. My name is in the kernel changelog exactly once, which means I helped find and fix a problem when I had never done so before - I didn't know what the heck I was doing. Kernel development is very complex, with it's own set of rules quite different from userspace and I was in there trying to work on it, sending emails to the maintainer of the md subsystem (raid etc.) For anyone reading my emails or code, I was, compared to them, a moron. My flailing about might have been frustrating for them.

    On the other hand, after almost 20 years I understand Linux pretty well from the userspace perspective, particularly the storage and security side of things. So when I'm in a meeting at work and the project manager wants to put certain files "on the C drive", when he wants to defrag and log in as Administrator, he becomes the moron and I'm the one getting frustrated.

    1. Re:Ps I AM the moron kernel contributor by GuB-42 · · Score: 2

      According to some interview, it seems that Linus is quite tolerant of "morons" like you.
      He knows kernel dev is hard and he doesn't expect newcomers to be perfect. He is, however, much less lenient with seasoned kernel developers and recognized experts, because they should know better.

  55. What an a-hole. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pretty sure I'd beat someone to death that ever talked about me or my work like that. Linus Torvalds and people like him are why I am self-employed. I will never bother with people like him ever again for the rest of my days.

  56. Agreed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's completely right. It's Linux 4.8, just like previous versions.

  57. Linux not a wonderful team environment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously dude, I understand that someone didn't refer to a 15 year old post on how to do things but you have to realise that being a dick about it does nothing for morale in the kernel developer team. Would you rather Andrew went 'screw it i'm off to write my own kernel'. You kernel is only as good as the developers you have writing it.

    It doesn't really matter either, just release an update for it. (you have done that before) and work out a way to stop it happening again.
    It's not like its going to have made it's way into any major release or systems yet.

  58. Pottering here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good idea, man!! don't know how I missed it. will work on integrating systemgdb into systemd

  59. Re:That's why it's called Linsux by amalcolm · · Score: 1

    Is so wish I hadn't read this with a mouthful of tea ... now I have tea all over my keyboard.

    --
    Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
  60. Re:Everyone is a moron to someone.... by dargaud · · Score: 2

    So where in the open source world are there regular code reviews with thought out discussions about how to write code better, how to follow the correct style guidelines, pointing out "oh by the way, you're using BUG_ON() the wrong way", and stuff like that?

    I really would like to know too. I write device driver for internal use, but I'll be torched down if I try to get them accepted in the kernel because there are so many things in them that I don't know how to do the 'correct' way.

    --
    Non-Linux Penguins ?
  61. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

    Exactly this. AFAIK he is equally harsh against his own errors.

  62. Re:That's why it's called Linsux by Maritz · · Score: 1

    Trolling works better when you're not quite so painfully obvious about it all.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  63. Re:Everyone is a moron to someone.... by Maritz · · Score: 2

    I'm fucking adding "come down off your thrown jerk-face" is my lexicon of phrases. Fucking ace.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  64. Re:He is almost 50! by gweihir · · Score: 1

    Oh, yes. And the young ones never understand that you really can spot it right away and keep arguing. The better ones come some time later and apologize because they have seen it as well, but it is still a pain how young people keep insisting on being stupid.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  65. 8+ Release Candidates in 8 weeks by sucko · · Score: 0

    may help explain problems.

  66. Re:He is almost 50! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    +1,000,000. At the moment I'm jumping between a few projects and finding myself on all sides of the fence in this example... knowing where you stand and is only half the battle :/

    Project A) I'm the most experienced in the team, and find major flaws in code, design, project plans, cost/time estimates, documentation etc 10seconds into every meeting. Arrogance/attitude starts becoming a problem (because I'm frequently in the right), and I have to keep checking myself and occasionally letting mistakes slide to avoid creating un necessary friction within the team, and let the juniors have enough rope to hang themselves so they can learn the hard way...after all making mistakes is usually the best way to learn what you should and shouldn't do.

    Project B) I'm the "junior" that learnt just enough python to do what I needed to do. Now I suddenly find myself tasked with creating a library for a system I'm totally unfamiliar with, while the rest of the super-smart + skilled team focus on their respective tasks. Now I'm the one making the "dumb" mistakes, googling "how to join arrays" and having to brace myself for the onslaught of "that code is horrible", "why the hell did you do it like that?" and questioning if I'm really cut out for the role.

    Project C) Everyone is at the same level in terms of experience and skills. We constantly congratulate each other on how much arse we're kicking... then Joe Blow from another team walks by, glances at the solution design and immediately finds a slew of reasons why it's not going to work....then you realise you've been so busy stroking each others egos that you stopped asking whether you should be doing what you're doing, and if that's really the best way to achieve it.

    Alot of times it's a delicate balance to get the right mix of humble pie, critical thinking and "trust me, I know from experience"

  67. Thing people still do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "so excuse me for being upset that people still do this shit almost 15 years later."

    Linux definitely shouldn't venture into IT Security... :-)

  68. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by MrKaos · · Score: 2

    I do excuse it. He is attacking the mistake of the person and not the person. Taking such stuff personally is ridiculous

    I think that's a thing about geeks/nerds. If they see something that is stupid, they just say so. Most of the time there is no filter or consideration of the person behind the idea and, the effort they put into an idea, but don't intend it to come across as something personal. Usually it's because the critic (Linus in this case) isn't able to seperate their own emotions from their criticisms of an idea. Their code may be beautiful but their interactions are not and conflict arises.

    Unfortunately we all do it to some extent however, I think the thing you have to look out for is when you start being an asshole most of the time because it puts people in the 'fuck you' mode, they don't listen to you anymore and, use BUG_ON. I'd imagine that he had some input as to who would be on the team so if they are morons, doesn't he share some blame for their actions?

    These guys rise to a level of Assholiness where no one questions them anymore and they stop evolving. I'm not making a character judgment here, I've certainly been an asshole from time to time when I am working to realize a vision. What I saying is that being that asshole held me back where I was, so I wonder what guys like this can achieve if they have people rallying behind them, instead of them thinking 'hey this guy is gonna act like a jerk if I do something they don't like'.

    Dealing with morons is frustrating however dealing with volatile people that can't control their emotions is too. No one gets what they want because a lack of charm inspires all the wrong things.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  69. Re:Everyone is a moron to someone.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try contacting Greg Kroah-Hartman. He was running a project a while ago (can't remember the name) to work with companies to get their driver code into the kernel.

  70. Re:"there is NO EXCUSE to knowingly kill the kerne by c · · Score: 2

    Yeah, that's the quote everyone highlights, but he's a bit more nuanced about it when he's maybe a bit less pissed. Two e-mails in, you have http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/l...:

    Killing machines because somebody made an assumption that was wrong is not ok.

    Killing the machine is ok if we have a situation where there literally
    is no other choice.

    --
    Log in or piss off.
  71. Re:Everyone is a moron to someone.... by r0kk3rz · · Score: 2

    I really would like to know too. I write device driver for internal use, but I'll be torched down if I try to get them accepted in the kernel because there are so many things in them that I don't know how to do the 'correct' way.

    No you probably won't be 'torched down', Linus' rants are typically aimed at people who aren't new to the Kernel and really should know better. If you're a newcomer to the Kernel they would afford you some leeway, just be prepared to take some constructive criticism on your code.

  72. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Praise by name... blame by category :-)

  73. BUG_OFF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe he needs to implement BUG_OFF and use it himself.

  74. Re:That's why it's called Linsux by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    Dangit gotta warn me when you are posting... now I'm going to have to replace the troll detector again. And two rooms of the house where it was sitting .. and a cat.

    Oh yeah, that is a module in SystemD you can call ... well sometimes that it ... it can be on or off. You change the results by viewing the binary logs

  75. Buggy crap written in C by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least it wasn't buggy crap written in C++.

  76. Re:Or attempting to derail threads Trump-style by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sorry for your salty tears, little one.

  77. Re:He is almost 50! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At well over 40, I'll put my programming skills up against yours any day, junior.

  78. It's not a philosophy, but a practical thing. by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
    It sounds like basically, he's of the philosophy that "the code must go on".

    It's not a philosophy, but a practical thing. He explained it in various postings. If BUG_ON() is used where it basically crashes the machine, it does not help, but hinder, debugging. Basically, once the machine crashes, there's no way of finding out wtf actually happened. And if this happens to users, they'll just hit the reset button and think that the OS is an unreliably, crashy piece of garbage.

    If the state of the machine is not fatally corrupt, there are better ways of dealing with a possible bug than intentionally crashing the machine. Logs, error messages, basically anything that's more useful than the machine suddenly freezing.

  79. Why Linux is relegated to side projects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When in college, Linux was just emerging and we thought it would take over the world. Well, some would say it has - count the number of places it's installed in data centers, in IoT devices and so forth. But we thought it would go mainstream on desktops. That has not happened.

    I submit that Torvald's behavior is what has been holding it back. He may be a genius. He may even be right. But with an inability to communicate with some measure of decency, people who have the skills to volunteer simply will not. People are people, not machines. They have emotions and respond to emotions with emotions.

    If he wants to go on a tirade, to piss on people loudly and publicly, he is free to do that. But that's not being a leader, it's being a child. I, for one, don't want to donate my time or the time of my development team to a project led by a child.

  80. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hell, he calls this his own error, for actually applying the patch.

  81. You are the Moron to be mad at. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you know kernel contributor Andrew Morton, who he says is debugging with a known bad use of BUG_ON(). "I've ranted against people using BUG_ON() for debugging in the past. why on earth would you accept his code. Much less apply it.
    Perhaps you need a vacation.

  82. Re:"there is NO EXCUSE to knowingly kill the kerne by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

    Actually Linus, there is a good excuse - when the failing of a logic assertion could silently lead to behavior that is worse than a kernel halt, specifically data corruption.

    Which raises the obvious question: why are there still faults which can result in data corruption? What's the excuse for there being a scenario where recovery would require data to be corrupted instead of at worst lost--which is the alternative to a kernel suicide.

  83. Re:"there is NO EXCUSE to knowingly kill the kerne by JoeyRox · · Score: 1

    They don't have to be known faults. I was speaking more about assertions to catch logic failures, which is especially useful to future-proof logic against subsequent changes that may violate assumptions built into the logic.

  84. Re:Everyone is a moron to someone.... by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

    If people use your code for a decade and a half, and there are still problems after all that time with employing it correctly, who is at fault?

    Every application cannot be as simple as an email client. Some things, like debuggers, are necessarily complex and can be difficult to configure and interpret properly. These complicated things require documentation, guidance, or training in order for people to use them correctly.

    He publicly posted a how-to in 2002. If people aren't following his guidance, either they're idiots or the guidance is too badly written to be useful. I looked at it, and I get the gist even though I am not a kernel developer---so it doesn't look like bad guidance.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
  85. Re:That's why it's called Linsux by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

    The only good kernel release is one that has been debugged in service by the Other Linux server company. If they are OK after 6 months of clean use, then do your own test and if that test succeeds, upgrade.

    I can't understand the panic to rush a kernel to the masses without proper testing.

    --
    Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  86. Re:"there is NO EXCUSE to knowingly kill the kerne by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

    It pretty much is. If your code hits BUG_ON, the kernel dumps a copy of the registers and stack trace then kills the process.

    Obviously, developers will want to use BUG_ON liberally in test builds. You stop making changes to the system and preserve a lot of data about failures, and that makes your life easier.

    But the official kernel is compiled for use on production systems. Things that need to run reliably all day. Things that can and should attempt to recover after a routine fails. The use of BUG_ON in official releases should be limited to situations where a system crash is the lesser of two evils.

    Linus is bitching about people using BUG_ON in production code for no good reason. It's easy to say he's being harsh, but it's hard to argue that he's wrong.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
  87. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    There are ways to do that that are just as effective in conveying the message, without making you sound like an ass.

    "Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excessive wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people rub together. Often the very young, the untravelled, the naive, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as "empty," "meaningless," or "dishonest," and scorn to use them. No matter how "pure" their motives, they thereby throw sand into machinery that does not work too well at best."

  88. After his rant he then added: by quax · · Score: 1

    "Now get of my lawn!"

  89. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Usually it's because the critic (Linus in this case) isn't able to seperate their own emotions from their criticisms of an idea

    Seriously?
    You actually wrote that?
    Did you read the post above at all or just "skim" and reply after seeing a few key words?
    I was writing about THE EXACT OPPOSITE PROBLEM of people who read the criticisms of an idea mistaking it for a personal attack, for extra laughs in this case they are mistaking it for an attack on a person that is not them.

    Unfortunately we all do it to some extent

    Not as such

    however dealing with volatile people that can't control their emotions

    Now that is a bit of a stretch. It's not as is we get a "Linus was angry" story every year.

  90. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Yes but sometimes if something is important enough you need to be very direct and blunt.
    For one personal example, when speaking to welders who were trying to get out of redoing some work that was faulty to the point of being life threatening when the machine was put back in service they kept pushing back with evasions and excuses until they were addressed very directly with copious amounts of profanity. While I would not speak to students in that way there are situations where it "removes the sand" by being very direct instead of what you have suggested.
    "The component has a crack so wide and deep that a ruler can be inserted 35mm, please address this risk to safety" sometimes seems to invite pushback while "it's fucked, fix it before it kills someone" does not.

  91. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by MrKaos · · Score: 1

    Usually it's because the critic (Linus in this case) isn't able to seperate their own emotions from their criticisms of an idea

    Seriously? You actually wrote that?

    Yes, are you criticising me or the idea? Many people don't take a minute to think about what is really important about their communication and allow their emotions to take over.

    Did you read the post above at all or just "skim" and reply after seeing a few key words?

    Yes, I read the thread before responding. I respect your opinion, I think it is only half the story. I think people who can't separate their message from their emotions are essentially unconscious retards who are unable to take responsibility for the manner of their communications or the consequences.

    I was writing about THE EXACT OPPOSITE PROBLEM of people who read the criticisms of an idea mistaking it for a personal attack, for extra laughs in this case they are mistaking it for an attack on a person that is not them.

    I was writing about THE EXACT OPPOSITE PERSPECTIVE of people who open their mouth before thinking about what their message is really about and lampooning their own valid criticisms with emotions they don't take a moment to control. You wouldn't speak to a stranger like that without expecting aggression.

    Unfortunately we all do it to some extent

    Not as such

    Well we will have to agree to disagree on that one because I think the difference is being self aware.

    however dealing with volatile people that can't control their emotions

    Now that is a bit of a stretch. It's not as is we get a "Linus was angry" story every year.

    Sure, I like Linus. He seems very mild mannered. I think his work is very important to a lot of professionals, but he makes his supporters look foolish when he flips the bird at a camera and sneers. He can be how he wants to be, however if he is unable to take ownership of his emotions it is hardly surprising that he will continue to have these issues, where his message is lost on how he says it.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  92. The kernel has gotten too unwieldy. by Larsen+E+Whipsnade · · Score: 1

    This is compelling evidence. It's gotten unmaintainable.

    Time to take stuff out. But it won't happen, will it? Nobody wants to lose his favorite feature.

    Refactor? Risky. Especially this late in the game.

    Now, if they were to add some sort of safe/smart pointers to gcc and throw up warnings on all pointer arithmetic, we might slowly refactor many data corruption issues and memory leaks away.

  93. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by dbIII · · Score: 1

    I've got no idea how you've managed to get that out of this situation. It appears to me as if you have it completely backwards and that "different perspective" appears to be very contrived.
    We've got Trump saying what is on his mind no matter who he offends all over the media (among many others) and you think Linus has lost it?

  94. Re:Everyone is a moron to someone.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quick guide on using BUG_ON() the correct way:

    Don't.

    BUG_ON() should probably have been named CRASH().

  95. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by MrKaos · · Score: 1

    I've got no idea how you've managed to get that out of this situation. It appears to me as if you have it completely backwards and that "different perspective" appears to be very contrived.

    Not really, take this for example:

    Damn I hate people who kill the machine for no good reason - Linus Torvalds.

    He is not attacking the idea, he is attacking the person. I understand why he is pissed off, because of how many machines it will fuck up, a totally valid criticism. You don't take it personally because it would be like taking personally a shark trying to eat you, it's just what they are. No one wants to be swimming with a shark when it is hungry though.

    Torvalds has a particular vision of what the kernel is and how it should behave. When people do something that interferes with his vision in an unfavourable way he reacts to it almost automatically, you see it all the time, it's impulse control. It's understandable, you don't *have* to take it personally, it's just who they are.

    That's what you see when you don't take it personally, the person's message and how they are, because you are in control of your reactions without seeing things through the lens of your own emotion.

    We've got Trump saying what is on his mind no matter who he offends all over the media (among many others) and you think Linus has lost it?

    On the contrary, I think Linus is a very sane person. I think in time he will see that his attitude is damaging to his vision of the kernel and that when he comes to realise and step beyond his own behaviour he will be much more effective - as will the people around him because they won't have anxiety interfering with their coding.

    Trump is a completely contrived character. A psychopath, dressed up as a real estate mogul, dressed up as a potential statesman. People get off on Donald trumpeting his rhetoric because they think they can be him one day.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  96. A matter of time. by phorm · · Score: 1

    Hopefully just a matter of time before this all works out-of-the-box. The Radeon driver works fairly well for my older card now, so I'm thinking a year from now all the prerequisite FOSS AMDGPU stuff will likely be built in Zombified Zebra (or whatever the next Ubuntu/Mint version is).

    For now, I'm fairly content that it works without a lot of fuss.

  97. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by suutar · · Score: 1

    At a workplace, I'd blame the manager. But nobody assigns people to work on the linux kernel, as far as I'm aware, and there's not a lot of actual consequences for bad action except reputation loss, are there?

  98. linus by gmit · · Score: 1

    I'd say it's about time to fork Linux and get rid of that impolite prick.

  99. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by dbIII · · Score: 1

    He is attacking the actions of the person.
    I know it's all sensitive, touchy/feelly and new age to pretend that an attack on an action carried out on a person is an attack on the person directly, but to be frank it's a very juvenile way of looking at things that we really should grow out of.

  100. I see only one whining douche here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like you're it. Fucking loser. You should just kill yourself now and stop wasting oxygen that useful people could breathe.

    1. Re:I see only one whining douche here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep those salty tears coming, you jobless, friendless virgin.

  101. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by MrKaos · · Score: 1

    He is attacking the actions of the person.

    I'll defer to you, say your right and give Linus the benefit of the doubt. It does not change that it's an uncivilized way to act. Not taking it personally doesn't make it any more civilized.

    I know it's all sensitive, touchy/feelly and new age to pretend that an attack on an action carried out on a person is an attack on the person directly

    I think it's having the presence of mind to be dignified. Bringing emotion to a conversation about code makes it personal, which means a person receiving such a message has every right to take it personally. If they don't take it personally, it makes them all the more dignified. "Treat others how you would have them treat you" is hardly new age.

    to be frank it's a very juvenile way of looking at things that we really should grow out of.

    I don't think it is juvenile. I think, when Linus grows out of it, he is going to feel increasingly embarrassed at not having the decorum to act like a leader, instead of just complaining when people don't listen to him because he doesn't.

    Interesting that we got here because I agreed with you to not take that behaviour personally, it would seem from two completely different points of view.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  102. Re:You really don't. Dealing with morons is frustr by mvdwege · · Score: 1

    On the contrary, I think Linus is a very sane person. I think in time he will see that his attitude is damaging to his vision of the kernel and that when he comes to realise and step beyond his own behaviour he will be much more effective - as will the people around him because they won't have anxiety interfering with their coding.

    Linus already realises that. I read the LKML daily, and real outbursts are pretty rare. Most of the time Linus is pretty understanding about mistakes, errors, and faults in procedure. The outbursts make the news because they are highly amusing.

    --
    "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?