Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux 5.0 Released (phoronix.com)

Posted by msmash on from the new-milestones dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Linus Torvalds has released Linux 5.0 in kicking off the kernel's 28th year of development. Linux 5.0 features include AMD FreeSync support, open-source NVIDIA Turing GPU support, Intel Icelake graphics, Intel VT-d scalable mode, NXP PowerPC processors are now mitigated for Spectre Variant Two, and countless other additions. eWeek adds: Among the new features that have landed in Linux 5.0 is support for the Adiantum encryption system, developed by Google for low power devices. Google's Android mobile operating system and ChromeOS desktop operating system both rely on the Linux kernel. "Storage encryption protects your data if your phone falls into someone else's hands," Paul Crowley and Eric Biggers, Android Security and Privacy Team at Google wrote in a blog post. "Adiantum is an innovation in cryptography designed to make storage encryption more efficient for devices without cryptographic acceleration, to ensure that all devices can be encrypted. Memory management in Linux also gets a boost in the 5.0 kernel with a series of improvements designed to help prevent memory fragmentation, which can reduce performance.

107 comments

  1. Is this going to require a reboot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure I remember my login anymore.

    1. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      you should be rebooting your server for some updates.

    2. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Also for a sanity check on your hardware. I never experience this with a Linux box, but on specialized Sun Hardware back in the early 2000's. Back then Uptime was a big deal, because system crashes were common. Linux at the time, you can get about a year of uptime, Windows NT perhaps 3 months max. However Sun Hardware can keep running for many years. However being that most of the time server hardware was used for specialized tasks, that most of the storage requirements were cached in RAM (Which back in the day have 1 or 2 gigs of RAM, was enough for nearly anything). So the Service will work and run constantly, even after the drive failed, because everything was running in RAM (and your logging went to an other drive). Only to have a long time power outage affect your years uptime, with a server that wouldn't start back up, because the boot and OS drive had failed years ago.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re: Is this going to require a reboot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, no reboot required.

    4. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not necessarily true. Only updates in Linux that need a reboot to take effect is the kernel and if you use a live patching method to update the kernel, you don't need to reboot for that either.

      For services simply restarting the service after updates will start the newer/patched version.

    5. Re: Is this going to require a reboot? by HongoBelando · · Score: 2

      too young to remember vax vms uptimes... range of ten years (for clusters not single node)

    6. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be easier (and more up-time friendly) to just schedule automated hardware diagnostics once a week or so? Especially if you're managing banks of computers, an automated email report that says "computer #2839 has a failing component X" is a lot more helpful than "#2839 failed it's reboot, go find the problem".

      It also has the benefit of finding most problems sooner, and letting you be standing by ready with a new, freshly imaged drive to swap in when the computer is shut down.

      Hmm, you'd probably need OS support, but you could even run piecemeal diagnostics on memory and CPUs while live. And those can introduce far more subtle errors in the rare cases that they start to fail.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    7. Re: Is this going to require a reboot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would think that would be hoped for in high-use areas, like a bank or airline reservations. I got out that environment not just because of corporate politics but because a lot of the DBAs were balding. And they were not aged men.

    8. Re: Is this going to require a reboot? by Crackez · · Score: 1

      I had a machine with over 10 years of uptime at my last job; it was a cobbled together firewall made from an old x86 load balancer, with the tiny little ide-flash drive replaced with a laptop drive (!) which eventually failed. It developed some bad sectors over the years on /home, which luckily wasn't needed for this machines role. I unmounted that filesystem probably 6 years in. I had backups...

      Btw, it was a pf firewall running on openbsd 3.x, can't remember exact release.

    9. Re: Is this going to require a reboot? by Chewbacon · · Score: 1

      A company I worked for had an old HP server running Linux. It had an up time record of two years and they shut it down to replace the power supply. Of course now uptime has taken the backseat to updating software.

      --
      Chewbacon
      The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
    10. Re: Is this going to require a reboot? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't consider a cluster uptime to be a fare comparison against a single computer server. This is why Cloud services are not going down all the time, because they too are clustered. And if the cloud service provider is actually good at their job, failure don't cause outages.
       

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    11. Re: Is this going to require a reboot? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Men begin balding in their early 20's.
      Also IT in sector economies (Government, Banking, Airline, Healthcare...) tend to have older staff, then the straight Tech companies. My previous job was a Tech Company, and I was the one of the oldest guys there. Then I went to work in Healthcare, and I became the baby in the group.
      Also the Hip and Trendy Tech startup culture, has a lot of (age, sex, race)ism, and even if you look older and not as bro(y) enough, you are really left out, not because of your skills, but because you just don't fit in what the company thinks a Hip and Trendy company should look like. Young Male White guys, sketching flowcharts on smart-boards, getting to work early and staying late.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    12. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      In today's more mature IT culture, yes. Back in the late 1990's and early 2000's Hot swapping components was often a bad idea, and required expensive often unreliable hardware. Also reporting on Failing components wasn't as much an option a lot of the time, it was either working or it didn't. The ultra expensive systems that cost over $50k had the ability, but the low end systems (like a Sun Ultra 5) wouldn't really have the ability.

      Back in the 1990's and early 2000's a lot of servers were ran under some ones office desk. Having a "Data Center" would be a room with better AC, and a UPS, and more power and network plugs.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    13. Re: Is this going to require a reboot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our Netware server had an uptime of several years back in the early 90s.

      Also, our Windows NT 4 servers had uptimes of over a year each.

    14. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My pfSense firewall had right around 430 days of uptime before I finally updated. My switch currently has 655days of uptime. I don't even have a UPS. My wifi AP had 200 days before I updated because of some practical issues fixed. My Windows desktop has 167days of uptime.

    15. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Who said anything about hot swapping? That certainly simplifies things even more, but just knowing that a component has failed *before* it becomes a problem, means that you could have a component in hand and ready to replace before shutting down the impaired computer, and thus lose only a few minutes of uptime during to the replacement, instead of likely adding at least a few hours to discover the problem and image a replacement drive while the computer is down.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    16. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Shaitan · · Score: 1

      You should be rebooting regardless. Excessive uptimes are NOT a good thing. How do you even know your box can come back up from a power cycle?

    17. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Shaitan · · Score: 1

      "back in the early 2000's. Back then Uptime was a big deal, because system crashes were common. Linux at the time, you can get about a year of uptime"

      What were you doing on a Linux box that only allowed you to get a year of uptime? Several of the systems I deployed in the early OO's were replaced 6-7yrs later without a reboot.

      That said, you are absolutely right. This is one of those outdated dick measuring contests that is doing nobody any good. Ideally, reboot every system on a rotation no longer than 60 days.

    18. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Shaitan · · Score: 1

      Yeah but you should be rebooting regularly anyway on a planned cycle. It was fun collecting high uptimes in the day but stupid.

    19. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Parker+Lewis · · Score: 1

      Not if you use solutions like Oracle Ksplice Uptrack, Canonical Livepatch, Red Hat's Kpatch or SUSE Kgraft. Anyway, on libc update, yes, reboot required.

    20. Re: Is this going to require a reboot? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      now uptime has taken the backseat to updating software

      Speak for Windows and Apple. With Linux it is normal to update without rebooting. You only need to reboot to change the kernel, and even then hot patching is a thing. This isn't just servers, but even general purpose computers that you are installing and deinstalling all kinds of things on constantly, including nasty things like games. I have often upgraded across major versions of Debian and even Ubuntu without rebooting.

      I had my primary workstation up for over 600 days at one point, only ended by a blackout that lasted longer than the UPS.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    21. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      This is one of those outdated dick measuring contests that is doing nobody any good.

      Nonsense, it is one measure of the design quality.

      Ideally, reboot every system on a rotation no longer than 60 days.

      Why on earth would you do that? Does it make everything feel nice and fresh to you? If you enjoy that then I suggest you also rotate the tires on your car every 60 days, and drop the engine for good measure. Of course you do that don't you?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    22. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Spoken as someone well and truly indoctrinated into the Windows culture.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    23. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      To be sure, you better reboot every day. Oh wait, every hour. Or maybe just don't turn it on, then you can be really sure.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    24. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Also for a sanity check on your hardware.

      I would say that the person who reboots unnecessarily needs a sanity check. Obsessive/compulsive maybe?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    25. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, another measure of the design quality was a screenshot of your Linux box with 100 xterms open along with xmms or something. One must remember that back in the real old days the competition to prove Linux's stability was really against Microsoft. That was pretty much a softball right there. Not that Linux was bad, even then it was damn good but, jeez, Windows? I don't recall the Linux gang crowing against SUN & Co. too much then. SUN was probably already dying but you needed X-ray spectacles to notice it. I went BSD pretty early on but not because of stability issues in Linux. It's all moot these days design quality is pretty high everywhere but if you want uptime to be your metric, fine. There will always be an uptime bigger than yours. Just keep that in mind.

    26. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back then in Windows 98 SE, I decided to select about 60 folders with the mouse, then right-click and click "Search...". Windows decided to open about 60 instance of the search window, flying by and populating the task bar. So on this ground Windows worked fine.

    27. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      Had the same thing in the 90s, a Sparc 1+ that had been running for years without interruption doing whatever it was it was set up for. Then one day there was a power cut, and we found it had a trashed superblock and hadn't been capable of booting for an unknown period of time.

    28. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      What were you doing on a Linux box that only allowed you to get a year of uptime?

      We used to dream of having an uptime of a year. Woulda' been a miracle to us. We used to run an old Windows 95 box found on a rubbish tip. We had a hundred and sixty of them situated in a small shoebox in the middle of the road. We got woken up every morning by having an alarm go off when Windows crashed, and then had a load of rotting fish dumped all over us! A year!? Hmph.

    29. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      the OP is clearly joking! /sarcasm

    30. Re: Is this going to require a reboot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should be running raid on your drives so that a disk failure and replacement causes zero downtime.

    31. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Monthly test of hardware...

    32. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Maybe when it's on and doing things, that's a test. Just saying.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    33. Re:Is this going to require a reboot? by renegadesx · · Score: 1

      But muh kpatch!!!!!
      I thought that was going to take care of everything!

      --
      Make SELinux enforcing again!
  2. encryption supervised by HongoBelando · · Score: 1

    Adiantum encryption system will be supervised by systemd thus soooo much better security

  3. 5.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Firefox and Chrome are soon in multiple hundreds already, what's this shit about version 5? Shouldn't linux be at like 1551642180? (if you catch my drift)

    1. Re:5.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It already is. Just remove the dots "Linux 4207-1". Look, it even has Microsoft beat.

    2. Re:5.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The dot is holy! You can't just remove the dot infedel!

    3. Re:5.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linus should just go to 7, like Patrick did.

    4. Re: 5.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      patrick goes to 11.

  4. They forgot the most important new feature: CoC v2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    They forgot the most important new feature: Code of Conduct v2.0. Every user of Linux now has to agree to a mile-long EULA upon installation (or updating), stating that if they are white and male, they must consume a minimum of 750 mg of estrogen pills every day to become "Trans Tux".

    Also, the previously hardcoded DNS fallback to Google's DNS servers has now become enabled by default and impossible to disable.

  5. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: Co by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No the CoC just says be nice

  6. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: Co by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > No the CoC just says be nice

    For someone else's definition of "nice"

  7. nvidia turing, thought we already had it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    running ubuntu 18.04 and the nvidia free driver seems to run the gtx2060. Not sure how to check that it is only partially awesome or fully awesome.

  8. Version Inflation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wake me up when they actually include some new features worth bumping the major version for.

    1. Re:Version Inflation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What did they break to warrant a major? Summary fails.

  9. Re:Ob by SurenEnfiajyan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Systemd is not a component of the Linux kernel. The bit better question is when systemd gets rid of the Linux kernel.

  10. Re: Ob by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Systemd could run on top of emacs. Or maybe the other way around.

    Well, the pile still needs a good editor.

  11. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: Co by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is kinda what being nice means.
    If your idea of being nice doesn't fir anyone else's definition of nice then you aren't nice.

  12. Linux 5.0 by MeanE · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...or as know by it's marking name Linux 2000.

    1. Re:Linux 5.0 by stooo · · Score: 1

      Noo.
      It's "Linux 3000" now

      --
      aaaaaaa
    2. Re:Linux 5.0 by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      MPFI Turbo

  13. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: Co by ebyrob · · Score: 1

    And if your definition of nice fit EVERYONES definition of nice, you'd have solved an NP impossible problem. Aha! So that's their angle.

  14. THANK YOU! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A huge Thank You to all contribuitors, the commander-in-chief, and the wide open source community.
    The supercomputing world would not be the same without you.

  15. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: Co by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The kind of s**t that has taken place at conferences, and is alluded to, by CoCs in general is understood by all to be 'not nice'. To say otherwise is to attempt to obfuscate that fact out of existence. "How many hairs are in a beard?" Well you tell me Philosophy 101 genius. The problem with CoCs is that it takes an attorney twenty pages to say what common sense can in a paragraph. An unwanted kiss is repaid with a boot to the crotch. Done. Except now the tender ones can yell about assault when in reality it was just the momentary appearance of a state of nature.

  16. About the version number by houghi · · Score: 3, Informative

    But I'd like to point out (yet again) that we don't do feature-based releases,
    and that "5.0" doesn't mean anything more than that the 4.x numbers started getting big enough that I ran out of fingers and toes.

    Just so people understand that this is not something extremely special.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:About the version number by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Time for all the clueless idiots in forums for things like ddwrt to queue up and start begging for the 5.0 kernel. They already complain that things like ddwrt aren't running the latest and greatest .something kernel even though it would likely do jack shit for the stability or security of said devices that ddwrt runs on. Hell some of the builds for older devices are still on 2.x kernels and they are not getting hacked left and right

    2. Re:About the version number by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft's answer: Screw it we are going to 7. Yes, we'll call it Windows 7

    3. Re:About the version number by stooo · · Score: 1

      it actually IS something special when you run out of toes and fingers.

      --
      aaaaaaa
    4. Re:About the version number by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is special. It effectively pushes Linus out of the 4.x kernel branch and puts Greg in charge of yet another.

      Either Linus wants out or is being forced, the optics are horrible for long term stability. Some of the shit being worked on by Potthead for example which will be pushed by RH (now IBM) and Facebook make systemdickhead seem like minor. He's actually gone on record saying UID's were antiquated, firewalls were difficult. cgroupsv2 isn't backward compatible but no one has complained (to him), and all that can only be solved with systemdickhead.

      It's that kind of centralization which will stangle the kernel.

    5. Re:About the version number by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 3, Informative

      It is special. It effectively pushes Linus out of the 4.x kernel branch and puts Greg in charge of yet another.

      Linus was never working on some "4.x kernel branch," as there isn't a separate branch of kernel development for each major version. He has always worked on the updates for the next mainline kernel release, regardless of what he's calling it.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    6. Re:About the version number by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you're a leper. Or in the Yakuza. Or a leper in the Yakuza.

    7. Re:About the version number by Ferocitus · · Score: 1

      Are you promoting Linux Diabeetus or just happy that your Mom and Dad are cousins?

      --
      USB, USB, USB!
    8. Re:About the version number by Shaitan · · Score: 1

      Yeah but at the same time I recall Linus holding off on 4.0 so he could get more into it.

    9. Re:About the version number by harrkev · · Score: 1

      If Linus just dropped his pants, we could have gotten one more version out of 4.x.

      --
      "-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
  17. Re:They forgot the most important new feature: CoC by MightyMartian · · Score: 1, Informative

    Jesus Christ, pal. Just grow up already. Maybe you're the apple in your mother's eye, but out in the real world, you're just another whining little asshole who is not nearly as important as you like to imagine.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  18. PowerPC! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NXP PowerPC processors are now mitigated for Spectre Variant Two

    So the PowerPC rack at AWS is safe to use again! Woo-hoo!

  19. Re:They forgot the most important new feature: CoC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you mentally ill?

  20. Re:They forgot the most important new feature: CoC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can DNS settings be impossible to disable if you have access to the source code?

  21. What is wrong with systemd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On /., there seems to be broad consensus hat systemd is bad. But it is widely used in Linux distributions. Why this disconnect? If it is so obviously bad, why is it in use?

    1. Re:What is wrong with systemd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eat shit. Billions of flies can't be wrong.
      Free riding on someone else's fairly poor maintenance, documentation, and horrible philosophy seems hard to resist - humans aren't really altruistic.

    2. Re:What is wrong with systemd? by mnmn · · Score: 1

      Enterprise-minded distros try to lock down and keep clean the config. Scripts do not help, so they try to go the route of monolithic binaries to do the config (smitty in AIX for example). However this rigidity is bad for free-form development and innovation, so more innovation happens in the car where the hood isn't welded shut (BSD, systemd-free Linux, previously Solaris). (Ok so systemd is more like the hood being screwed on with hex allan keys rather than welded).

      Systemd (and selinux in Redhat's case) are technologies that work for a certain design vision where stuff is locked down and more predictable. You can use pre-packaged apps that fit this structure with greater ease and security, at the cost of more pain with custom or alpha software (write selinux contexts and systemd service unit files rather than add a bash script under /etc/rc.d)

      --
      "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
    3. Re:What is wrong with systemd? by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      I think that you can find answers to both questions (and why many admins like systemd) in this interesting video from a FreeBSD developer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    4. Re:What is wrong with systemd? by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      You can execute bash scripts with systemd if what you are trying to accomplish does not fit within a unit file. Btw if you haven't seen this video about systemd from a FreeBSD developer than I can highly recommend it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    5. Re: What is wrong with systemd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If FreeBSD ever went full retard and ported systemD over and made it the default, it would quickly go the way of the DoDo bird. Dragonfly and Net would quickly become the goto BSD. Openbsd will always be the best bsd tho.

    6. Re:What is wrong with systemd? by Shaitan · · Score: 1

      Because certain influential groups got behind it and religious about it and decided to shove it down everyone's throats. Also there is a religious cult who steps in any time someone does this and says everyone opposed to a bad idea is a luddite. It's sort of like how denying you are an addict automatically makes you an addict. s/addict/circular_logic_label_of_the_day/i

    7. Re:What is wrong with systemd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a result of freeloading on corporate development. There's nothing inherently wrong with that except that with the vast majority of contributions coming from corporate entities you're going to also be getting their corporate agenda, you can't have it both ways. A fork of the kernel that didn't accept contributions from corporations would be a complete failure for example and the general distro landscape's reliance on RedHat means they get to dictate certain things and that's why the overwhelming majority of distros in use are using systemd.

    8. Re:What is wrong with systemd? by mnmn · · Score: 1

      Thanks, this video was quite informative

      --
      "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
  22. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: Co by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The point is, someone else decided how YOU should behave. And if you don't agree, well, sorry--you're out.

    Nobody bothered to ask me what kind of conduct *I* think is appropriate or acceptable, and I really doubt they bothered to ask you either!

  23. What is this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I came here for news about Tesla because Slashdot is the #1 source for all things Elon Musk and I'm finding this GNU/Linux stuff. What gives?

    1. Re:What is this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Model Y uses Linux 5.0 to drive you home from the pub.

    2. Re:What is this? by Shaitan · · Score: 1

      It's a philosophical hijacking by GNU people who are butthurt their OS (Hurd) sucks and everyone uses Linux. Try to ignore it.

  24. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: C by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    heres a participation trophy for you. you're speshul. its cute that you think you need to be asked about anything that affects you.

  25. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: C by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > heres a participation trophy for you. you're speshul. its cute that you think you need to be asked about anything that affects you.

    Baaaaa, baaaaa!

  26. Re: Ob by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And an init system...

  27. Dunce versioning schemes by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    The real world effect of policy to arbitrarily increment major number is widespread unnecessary confusion.

    1. Re: Dunce versioning schemes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You haven't seen widespread confusion until you've DECREMENTED a major version number.

    2. Re: Dunce versioning schemes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You haven't seen widespread confusion until you've excremented a major version number.

    3. Re:Dunce versioning schemes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Qualify yourself. How does increasing major version numbers lead to any confusion.

  28. Re:They forgot the most important new feature: CoC by RuiFRibeiro · · Score: 2

    Does it needs to be asked? He is not mentally ill, he is an opinionated jerk.

  29. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: Co by RuiFRibeiro · · Score: 1

    Have you been so brainwashed that you do not distinguish between the definition of censorship and being nice?

  30. my fork of linux doesn't have a CoC by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

    Come send me your pull requests! We don't have to just complain, we can actually use code that aligns with what we want it to do, without the ideological BS.

    --
    GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    1. Re:my fork of linux doesn't have a CoC by Shaitan · · Score: 1

      You lost me at GNU. Linux is not a GNU project.

    2. Re:my fork of linux doesn't have a CoC by Beat+The+Odds · · Score: 1

      You lost me at GNU. Linux is not a GNU project.

      You must be GNU here.

  31. Re:Ob by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The bit better question is when systemd gets rid of the Linux kernel.

    That would be just after "systemd becomes self aware" and right before "systemd launches a nuclear strike at itself due to a trivial bug in its GPS module marked WONTFIX".

  32. Version numbers? by HyperQuantum · · Score: 1

    We can increment them!

    --
    I am not really here right now.
  33. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: Co by Shaitan · · Score: 1

    For anyone having a hard time keeping up. The old CoC said to be nice.

  34. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: Co by Shaitan · · Score: 1

    And in the sane world both the kisser and the kicker don't go to court or jail and both should be able to contribute code if the code is good.

  35. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: Co by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is there anything in there you object to or think needs to be added?

  36. Re: Ob by Xtifr · · Score: 1

    Emacs has shipped with a systemd unit file since v26.0.

    http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cg...

  37. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: Co by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not so fast. Conferences are not extra-legal. In a jurisdiction, the laws of which considers an unwanted kiss to be assault, it's still a police matter if the kissed pushes it there. I don't abandon the rule of law just because the Conference might get its Nielsen rating clobbered. You do that and you'll eventually get Universities who handle real rape cases as "internal issues" within their own little fiefdom, never bringing in LE. Oh, wait...

  38. Re: They forgot the most important new feature: Co by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whoosh!

  39. Re:They forgot the most important new feature: CoC by fbobraga · · Score: 1

    another flamebait... grow up

  40. version 4.20 for life! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone had to say it.

  41. noted by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

    issue created, seems like an easy enough thing to remedy.

    --
    GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.