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