+#if defined(__alpha__) && defined(CONFIG_PCI) +/* + * The meaning of life, the universe, and everything. Plus + * this makes the year come out right. + */ + year -= 42; +#endif (From the patch for 1.3.2: (kernel/time.c), submitted by Marcus Meissner)
Linux is obsolete (Andrew Tanenbaum)
lp1 on fire (One of the more obfuscated kernel messages)
/* * Oops. The kernel tried to access some bad page. We'll have to * terminate things with extreme prejudice. */ die_if_kernel("Oops", regs, error_code); (From linux/arch/i386/mm/fault.c)
/* * [...] Note that 120 sec is defined in the protocol as the maximum * possible RTT. I guess we'll have to use something other than TCP * to talk to the University of Mars. * PAWS allows us longer timeouts and large windows, so once implemented * ftp to mars will work nicely. */ (from/usr/src/linux/net/inet/tcp.c, concerning RTT [retransmission timeout])
But don't forget alternative platforms (mine being an alpha system) running Linux.
In other words, the only way to fairly support Linux DVD is an open source driver.
Right now I'm busy porting Glide over to eventually get DRI running on X4!!! If I see some good DVD software, I don't mind decoding in SW on my alpha. I've got the cycles to spare. Plus, the Multimedia instruction set (simular to MMX) can decode 8 pixels of MPEG per cycle.
I think you are talking very subtle shades of "truly commited to Open Source."
I disagree. There are people at 3dfx who are working hard to get Open Source in the door. (Joseph & Kieth). Maybe management isn't 100% on board, but neither is Matrox.
It's a shame that the ONLY company that has released all specs and driver code is being slamed here. Matrox always has to be cajouled into releasing their specs.. just usable specs even).
In all of my talking with 3dfx people, never have they held back on the technical details of the glide driver or the hardware. (I am working on the h3 branch of glide to the alpha platform).
Please read this message and tell me they arn't working. I just can't agree with your assment that they are so much the better kind of folks.!
> Thanks for the detailed response. However, simply because we haven't > released info yet doesn't mean we aren't working on it as we speak and that > we don't intend to. Most of the data was never meant for public > consumption and much of it needs to be reformatted, completed, etc. for > release. Our culture is very engineering driven and so, as you might > expect, there are many radical linux heads running around the company saying > we should make all of our IP public including our our vlsi chip designs... > =) > > Anyway, everything you said is well understood here. Well understood. > We've been working with Precision Insight to enable fast 3D on linux for > quite some time. You will continue to see lots of action in the open > source/linux community soon from 3dfx. We intend to be a primary > contributor. To date, we've released our 2D specs, our new compression > algorithm (fxt1), and more WILL follow. =) > > > Keith
I'll take a 3dfx or a Matrox to a nVidia or a Yamaha (Which I have spent alot of time talking to about OSS). 3dfx seems to have followed up on their promises of open source drivers and specs, and has done really well.. please explain exactly what they have failed at provinding to developers of open source code since they provided the documentation and source code last December.
Secure Computing also wants to sell it to financial houses, etc.
And, by definition, unless Secure is simply an onsite "contractor" then they are distributing it to the NSA. They also plan to hold onto the copyright on the code as well.
(Instead, use relatively dumb and cheap satellites and keep the complex processing in a handful of distributed ground stations. Sure, you'd have to use two satellites each call, but reducing the complexity and weight of each satellite would save lots. And upgrading the system in the future would involve ground station upgrades, instead of satellite replacements). Hate to argue, but unless the specs for iridium have changed... that is exaxtly how they worked. And that is a design flaw,IMHO. If all of the switching were performed in space, then signals could have been direct to nearest downlink teleco, instead of the convuluted ground base stations, plus the many Iridium companies which exist to manage them. Good riddence. I talked to Iridium in 1992 and told then that unless they could do a 64k uplink/128k downlink they were sunk. Bah.. such a waste!!! Well, Moto is now the official BONEHEAD of the millenium. Pan
If you think this is limited to the old generation, you havn't met the current crop of uber-corperates (pardon my greek).
To simply put it, our friendly mpaa/riaa would have us have 2 choices -
* rampant crime, anarchy, uncontrolled bahavior (lost profit) * total content control, and the breaking of the spirit of creation (huge profit).
But then again, there's always the third choice. Don't play. Support TRUE open standards.
Do we have this passion that all the RIAA and MPAA is good? Do we have to support CSS'ed DVD?
Here we have this HUGE communications machine called the INTERNET. We have knowledge apon knowledge. Our 30 minutes a day * 100,000 brains EASILY can beat opponents.
But we choose to attack the horses ass. We need to know the true battle.
The real battle isn't about the specs! But that's what concerns our little brains in the corner because that's what we look at ALL DAY LONG.
Compare this to the TCP/IP standards bodies (IETF). Who is working for who?
The only alpha system that uses big endian is Cray. Yes, even the PowerPC is switchable. In fact, most RISC "based" chips are switchable. I think TaligentOS used big endian as well (IIRC).
<i>"Hopefully the IA-64 Linux porting effort is doing the Right Thing and using the big-endian mode."</i>
I'd rather have an Elbrus 2k any day.;-) Or how about a snap-on mood ring for Celeron CPU's? Alas.. I digress..
I think that the biggest problems with C have been solved with better implementations of libc personally. If you are looking at C++, take a look at java first. Because you can comprehend it.. it is very comprehensive, yet it manages to all fit (design process wise) that C++ always seemed to suck at.
Anybody that hasn't taken a look at glib is really missing out on some great new C features that you will soon not be able to live without. (glib != gnu lib c)
It is the fact that their "trade secret" is no longer viable.
The stranglehold they have on DVD player makers will be lost if they don't defend this case until there's blood on the ground. You will see DVD players now that don't contain any technology licenses by the DVD-CCA from the MPAA.
I take no issue on your business choice. Like I said, that's A-OK. Sorry Metroworks failed you.. take a look at what else is out there.
You are free to select whatever tools you want, for whatever political, economic, or personal reasons you have. But my choice is based squarely on issues of reliability, economy, performance, and the precise needs of our business. To make our choice for us is a bit presumptuous, don't you think?
I made no political, economic, or personal argument. Would it be wrong if I did? It sounds like that's what YOU were doing to me. "Professional programers BUY their tools.", "Company's don't care about free software." "Metrolink is a better solution than gcc", were your arguments, respectivly to political, economic, and personal arguments.
Your rhetoric is trying to equate your personal preference as technically superior. I just don't think you know the difference between technical issues and personal preferences.
Maybe if you were to apply some of you 20 years of "what works and what doesn't" in the form of hand to keyboard, you could help develop tools that fit your preferences. We could use a better IDE for Linux.
Metrowerks has what is arguably one of the best cross-platform environments for doing this and now you'll never see it (or the software that would have been ported with it) because Metrowerks has reneged on a long-standing promise. Boo!
Okay, I'll let you argue your point. How about this... GCC is targeted at over a 30 microprocessors.
Entire x86 line
Alphas
SPARC
MIPS
68x
88k
SH2-4
PPC
etc
Can run under
SunOS
Solaris
Linux
FreeBSD
BSDi
NetBSD
OpenBSD
Windows (3.1,95,98,NT,2k)
MacOS, MacOS-X
AmigaOS
AtariOS (geos?)
etc
Not that I don't mean to say that your prefered environment isn't FANTASTIC.. but it is certainly not the best cross platform(if judged by this merit alone) tool available. I too would like to see a better interface developed for GNU.. but it's not there yet.
Also, don't you even TRY and argue that you are more a more professional developer because you bought your tools. The software and web-sites I have single-handedly designed and wrote over the past 5 years has brought on over 150 Million dollars of revenue a year. And yeah.. I still prefer perl, gnu c, and make.
And you comment about managing "large complicated projects" doesn't even push wind. Please.. someone do a wc -l on/usr/src/linux.. and while you're at it.. take a look at XFree as well.
I would argue that our "antiquated" tools are MUCH better designed for large, complicated, and geographically devided development teams. It just doesn't hold water to compare them. Good tools fit the developer, not the other way around. Good tools can use command line AND gui environments well. I havn't use Metrolink in 3 years.. but it wasn't there yet.
Besides, it makes you look like a ranting asshole. If you have a preference for the Metrolink development environment - then that's A-OK. Enjoy it. But why the need to take cheap pot-shots at the rest of us?
Maybe you guys are in love with IDE's or whatever? I happen to like Visual C++.. but I don't see a big incentive for having new compilers. I'd rather see an improved Gnu compiler... I'd pay for an improved compiler.
Because we ALREADY have to target multiple environments right now.. I can't even imagine having a new compiler on the block. Nightmare, IMHO.
So, go ahead and get Metroworks if you can.. but I hope they spend the time to "fit" into the linux model.. (comparable switches... command line compiler, etc.). If not, then they won't get my business.
Well.. one thing coming in XFree4 is the ability to use your MGA card for video acceleration. The G200 supports overlays.. and from what Raster has said, it if fscking awesome. (In fact everyone is pretty much in awe. Full, 30FPS with very very little CPU... can maybe even be done in DMA in the future)
Your going to see some integration of OpenGL into the 2D rendering structure in the future. It really depends on the HW. But there is talk of using OpenGL in conjunction of XIE.
Slashdot Mirror
+#if defined(__alpha__) && defined(CONFIG_PCI) /*
/usr/src/linux/net/inet/tcp.c, concerning RTT [retransmission timeout])
+
+ * The meaning of life, the universe, and everything. Plus
+ * this makes the year come out right.
+ */
+ year -= 42;
+#endif
(From the patch for 1.3.2: (kernel/time.c), submitted by Marcus Meissner)
Linux is obsolete
(Andrew Tanenbaum)
lp1 on fire
(One of the more obfuscated kernel messages)
/*
* Oops. The kernel tried to access some bad page. We'll have to
* terminate things with extreme prejudice.
*/
die_if_kernel("Oops", regs, error_code);
(From linux/arch/i386/mm/fault.c)
/*
* [...] Note that 120 sec is defined in the protocol as the maximum
* possible RTT. I guess we'll have to use something other than TCP
* to talk to the University of Mars.
* PAWS allows us longer timeouts and large windows, so once implemented
* ftp to mars will work nicely.
*/
(from
Yanked from fortune...
Pan
I think it specifically refers to the VT-OS... not the Linux OS.
If I were wrong, well I better be wrong....
Pan
They don't want unencrypted digital audio anywhere on your PC. They want the speakers to decrypt the audio with the RIAA private key.
Pan
Point well taken...
But don't forget alternative platforms (mine being an alpha system) running Linux.
In other words, the only way to fairly support Linux DVD is an open source driver.
Right now I'm busy porting Glide over to eventually get DRI running on X4!!! If I see some good DVD software, I don't mind decoding in SW on my alpha. I've got the cycles to spare. Plus, the Multimedia instruction set (simular to MMX) can decode 8 pixels of MPEG per cycle.
Pan
Bruce,
I think you are talking very subtle shades of "truly commited to Open Source."
I disagree. There are people at 3dfx who are working hard to get Open Source in the door. (Joseph & Kieth). Maybe management isn't 100% on board, but neither is Matrox.
It's a shame that the ONLY company that has released all specs and driver code is being slamed here. Matrox always has to be cajouled into releasing their specs.. just usable specs even).
In all of my talking with 3dfx people, never have they held back on the technical details of the glide driver or the hardware. (I am working on the h3 branch of glide to the alpha platform).
Please read this message and tell me they arn't working. I just can't agree with your assment that they are so much the better kind of folks.!
> Thanks for the detailed response. However, simply because we haven't
> released info yet doesn't mean we aren't working on it as we speak and
that
> we don't intend to. Most of the data was never meant for public
> consumption and much of it needs to be reformatted, completed, etc. for
> release. Our culture is very engineering driven and so, as you might
> expect, there are many radical linux heads running around the company
saying
> we should make all of our IP public including our our vlsi chip
designs...
> =)
>
> Anyway, everything you said is well understood here. Well understood.
> We've been working with Precision Insight to enable fast 3D on linux for
> quite some time. You will continue to see lots of action in the open
> source/linux community soon from 3dfx. We intend to be a primary
> contributor. To date, we've released our 2D specs, our new compression
> algorithm (fxt1), and more WILL follow. =)
>
>
> Keith
I'll take a 3dfx or a Matrox to a nVidia or a Yamaha (Which I have spent alot of time talking to about OSS). 3dfx seems to have followed up on their promises of open source drivers and specs, and has done really well.. please explain exactly what they have failed at provinding to developers of open source code since they provided the documentation and source code last December.
Panaflex
They may have a contractual "right", but there are no guarantees to happyness and profit in the USA.
(unless you're the RIAA *grin*)
Pan
Wow, that's great!
I didn't know you could *copyright* a trade secret! That's illegal.
Boy.. looks like we're all in trouble!
Pan
Because Rob didn't want to be the next mozilla, of course!!
Panaflex
But you don't understand. If microsoft said the sky was red, then the court would say yes it is!
Even if only because the sky is red at dusk..
Twisting truth for fun and profit.
Pan
Secure Computing also wants to sell it to financial houses, etc.
And, by definition, unless Secure is simply an onsite "contractor" then they are distributing it to the NSA. They also plan to hold onto the copyright on the code as well.
Either case, they must release the code.
Pan
(Instead, use relatively dumb and cheap satellites and keep the complex processing in a handful of distributed ground stations. Sure, you'd have to use two satellites each call, but reducing the complexity and weight of each satellite would save lots. And upgrading the system in the future would involve ground station upgrades, instead of satellite replacements).
Hate to argue, but unless the specs for iridium have changed... that is exaxtly how they worked. And that is a design flaw,IMHO. If all of the switching were performed in space, then signals could have been direct to nearest downlink teleco, instead of the convuluted ground base stations, plus the many Iridium companies which exist to manage them.
Good riddence. I talked to Iridium in 1992 and told then that unless they could do a 64k uplink/128k downlink they were sunk.
Bah.. such a waste!!!
Well, Moto is now the official BONEHEAD of the millenium.
Pan
If you think this is limited to the old generation, you havn't met the current crop of uber-corperates (pardon my greek).
To simply put it, our friendly mpaa/riaa would have us have 2 choices -
* rampant crime, anarchy, uncontrolled bahavior (lost profit)
* total content control, and the breaking of the spirit of creation (huge profit).
But then again, there's always the third choice. Don't play. Support TRUE open standards.
Do we have this passion that all the RIAA and MPAA is good? Do we have to support CSS'ed DVD?
Here we have this HUGE communications machine called the INTERNET. We have knowledge apon knowledge. Our 30 minutes a day * 100,000 brains EASILY can beat opponents.
But we choose to attack the horses ass. We need to know the true battle.
The real battle isn't about the specs! But that's what concerns our little brains in the corner because that's what we look at ALL DAY LONG.
Compare this to the TCP/IP standards bodies (IETF). Who is working for who?
Pan
You should go check and see how much Intel owns in VA Linux.
You'd have better results shopping your design to a korean manufacturing firm. I bet that they'd jump all over that puppy.
The "Big Boys" that own their own fab are too competitive and greedy to invest any help in this. You'd have to go out and sell your soul to lucifer.
Pan
Go smoke a duck. *quack*
;-)
The only alpha system that uses big endian is Cray. Yes, even the PowerPC is switchable. In fact, most RISC "based" chips are switchable. I think TaligentOS used big endian as well (IIRC).
<i>"Hopefully the IA-64 Linux porting effort is doing the Right Thing and using the big-endian mode."</i>
I'd rather have an Elbrus 2k any day.
Or how about a snap-on mood ring for Celeron CPU's? Alas.. I digress..
Pan
You go brother man!! You nailed it!
I think that the biggest problems with C have been solved with better implementations of libc personally. If you are looking at C++, take a look at java first. Because you can comprehend it.. it is very comprehensive, yet it manages to all fit (design process wise) that C++ always seemed to suck at.
Anybody that hasn't taken a look at glib is really missing out on some great new C features that you will soon not be able to live without. (glib != gnu lib c)
Pan
What if the DMCA isn't constitutional? It's a pretty big puppy to skin.. but with enough oomph, someone could do it!
Pan
It is the fact that their "trade secret" is no longer viable.
The stranglehold they have on DVD player makers will be lost if they don't defend this case until there's blood on the ground. You will see DVD players now that don't contain any technology licenses by the DVD-CCA from the MPAA.
They stand to loose quite a bundle...
Panaflex
I take no issue on your business choice. Like I said, that's A-OK. Sorry Metroworks failed you.. take a look at what else is out there.
You are free to select whatever tools you want, for whatever political, economic, or personal reasons you have. But my choice is based squarely on issues of reliability, economy, performance, and the precise needs of our business. To make our choice for us is a bit presumptuous, don't you think?
I made no political, economic, or personal argument. Would it be wrong if I did? It sounds like that's what YOU were doing to me. "Professional programers BUY their tools.", "Company's don't care about free software." "Metrolink is a better solution than gcc", were your arguments, respectivly to political, economic, and personal arguments.
Your rhetoric is trying to equate your personal preference as technically superior. I just don't think you know the difference between technical issues and personal preferences.
Maybe if you were to apply some of you 20 years of "what works and what doesn't" in the form of hand to keyboard, you could help develop tools that fit your preferences. We could use a better IDE for Linux.
Pan
Okay, I'll let you argue your point. How about this... GCC is targeted at over a 30 microprocessors.
Can run under
Not that I don't mean to say that your prefered environment isn't FANTASTIC.. but it is certainly not the best cross platform(if judged by this merit alone) tool available. I too would like to see a better interface developed for GNU.. but it's not there yet.
Also, don't you even TRY and argue that you are more a more professional developer because you bought your tools. The software and web-sites I have single-handedly designed and wrote over the past 5 years has brought on over 150 Million dollars of revenue a year. And yeah.. I still prefer perl, gnu c, and make.
And you comment about managing "large complicated projects" doesn't even push wind. Please.. someone do a wc -l on
I would argue that our "antiquated" tools are MUCH better designed for large, complicated, and geographically devided development teams. It just doesn't hold water to compare them. Good tools fit the developer, not the other way around. Good tools can use command line AND gui environments well. I havn't use Metrolink in 3 years.. but it wasn't there yet.
Besides, it makes you look like a ranting asshole. If you have a preference for the Metrolink development environment - then that's A-OK. Enjoy it. But why the need to take cheap pot-shots at the rest of us?
Pan
Maybe you guys are in love with IDE's or whatever? I happen to like Visual C++.. but I don't see a big incentive for having new compilers. I'd rather see an improved Gnu compiler... I'd pay for an improved compiler.
Because we ALREADY have to target multiple environments right now.. I can't even imagine having a new compiler on the block. Nightmare, IMHO.
So, go ahead and get Metroworks if you can.. but I hope they spend the time to "fit" into the linux model.. (comparable switches... command line compiler, etc.). If not, then they won't get my business.
Pan
Yeah.. it would take a LONG time to get pretty consistant with "unistrokes"
pan
Do you trust a bunch of suits out for profit, or
do you trust someone, like say.. the EFF? I mean really.. go get OpenSSL and start your own CA.
nuff said.
pan
Well.. one thing coming in XFree4 is the ability to use your MGA card for video acceleration. The G200 supports overlays.. and from what Raster has said, it if fscking awesome. (In fact everyone is pretty much in awe. Full, 30FPS with very very little CPU... can maybe even be done in DMA in the future)
Your going to see some integration of OpenGL into the 2D rendering structure in the future. It really depends on the HW. But there is talk of using OpenGL in conjunction of XIE.
Pan
A few people have taken a look at it. Apparently there are some problems with it.. but I havn't seen any patches or fixes.
Pan
bzzzt. Glide IS the driver. And they have open specs. and open source.
take a look at dri.sourceforge.net and weep, AC.
Pan