Do you really think all the Linux kernel developers who have put years into Linux will all of a sudden start releasing crappy, untested kernels? Come on now, think a little before you shout the sky is falling.
Maybe, maybe not. I though for a horrible moment that Linus and friends were saying, "we don't care about code stability any more, let's leave that to RedHat." When they talk about "the distributions" they mean RedHat. In corporate America Linux==RedHat. That would leave all other distributions behind. Effectively, everyone else would be waiting for RedHat to submit their patches. There would be forking of the kernel. Us v.s Them and all that.
I just think it's a bit gung-ho chucking new stuff in the mainline kernel. You don't have to use devfs in any 2.4 or 2.6 kernel. You don't have to chose it as an option at compile time. That's why I think it wasn't a good example to chose and a non-issue. From my point of view, I don't care whether devfs goes away in 2.4.28, 2.6.99 or 2.8.10, I don't compile it it.
The whole idea of free software is that anyone is free to develop the software in whatever way they want to develop it. If you don't like how the developers are doing it, fork the kernel and do it your way. Who are you to dictate whether the idea is to make a "working, useful product"? The idea is whatever the developer wants the idea to be.
OK then. I take your point. Linux has now become useless to me. It's going to be in a perpetual state of flux, even in the "stable" tree, with whatever unforseen problems that creates.
Now here this slashdot: I give up. I'm going to buy a Mac.
I'm not talking about "bleeding edge" I'm taking about the even-middle-numbered kernels i.e. stable. I do not have the time nor patience to run development kernels. I am protesting about the developers turning the "main kernel tree" into a constant, perpetual development kernel. That belongs in an odd number.
It comes with no warantee
In the hope that it might be useful.
Plus, what feature or bugfix have you needed that required a brand new kernel?
Bug and security fixes mainly.
It was not the latest at the time and I did not upgrade to 2.2 until I've heard reports that it was stable.
Well I've not long upgraded to 2.4 (about a year). I held out till they put a stable VM in. I needed the extra hardware support, otherwise I'd have stayed on 2.2.
My 486sx runs 2.2. I also have two K6-2s, 2 P-IIs, and various other odds and ends. They don't run "development" kernels, only mature, stable ones.
I'm not a kernel developer, so I don't want to spend all night debugging. I get my distro from Slackware (yes, I've parted with money).
Do you also run around updating every other part of your distribution by yourself for new minor releases?
Actually, I do, and I often compile applications from source as well.
Why is it that so many people believe it is their RIGHT to be able to muck around with core of an OS
That's the whole damned point of Free Software: Freedom!
hey probably wouldn't do it with the sources of XFree86, KDE and GNOME?
I've compiled X from scratch once or twice, and pottered around with parts of GNOME that needed upgrading for various reasons. I don't use KDE. I've also tried various other things, usually under development. I'm not scared.
What scares me is that "the community" is no longer going to aim to produce a stable kernel, but rather, it will be up to the commercial distributors. This goes against the whole idea of Free Software. The idea is to make a working, useful product, not half-baked cripple-ware that you then have to pay someone to fix. I understand the concept of paying other people to "add value" i.e. enhanced features, but I don't regard stability as an "enhanced feature." A lot of people who don't alread run Linux (but maybe Windows) will now have one less reason to change and one more piece of FUD to beat the Free and Open Source Software movement with.
I'm a Slakware man myself, but I don't like sitting around waiting for Patrick to make a new kernel. I like to update my kernel myself from the official Linus tarball as and when required. This will no longer be possible.
This could set back Linux by years, if loads of unstable kernels keep coming out. People will be forced to wait until a kernel distributor (RedHat, Suse, etc.) get around to putting one out. That may not be fast enough for some people, and may be too expensive as well. It could be darned inconvenient if you nees new hardware support.
Microsoft, Apple and Sun will be falling over themselves with laughter when they see this. Linux's legendary stability will go down the pan, and people will leave in droves. Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer especially will make great capital out of this.
In the USA "school" often refers to University or College. Here in the UK (the subject of this article) "school" means primary school (grade school) or secondary school (high school).
In England, secondary school lasts either 5 years or 7 depending on whether you take A-Levels. In Scotland, secondary school lasts either 4, 5 or 6 years depending on which exams you take, and how old you are (you can not leave until you are 16 or there abouts). Things are changing in the Scottsh system these days. It's all different to when I left 12 years ago.
Now, Your teachers depending on their level of expertise will probably either ask you to remove that theme or actually wonder what the heck is going on. This can be a good thing if your teachers are smart - getting them to join the rebellion will help you in your fight.
If only it were so easy. Decisions about IT in schools are usually out of the hands of the teachers and the teachers have very little say. My mother is head of a business studies department in a Scottish school. It's amazing the kind of rubbish they have to use and put up with. You will find it very difficult to effect change from the grass roots. Someone higher up the educational food chain, usually at school governor level or above, needs to know someone who works for someone who knows about these things in an official capacity. For example, if you were the head teacher of the school or a governor or someone high up in the local education authority who knew someone who was high up in an IT company you might get listened to. Believe me, we've been chipping away from the low end for years...
OpenBIOS is what you want, and unlike LinuxBIOS, it's implementing an Open Standard too, as used by IBM, Apple and Sun : IEEE 1275-1994 or Open Firmware.
IA64's dead? Better get on the phone to SGI and let them know!
It's only them and HP in it now. HP is going to intel's Opteron clone, and SGI revived MIPS development. I've no doubt we'll see Opteron/Linux machines from SGI sooner or later.
A: One is secure, reliable, mature, scalable, portable and ubiquitous with an installed base in the billions and a developer community in the millions with thousands of open source code programs written in it. The other is called C#.
I know what stupid PHBs will do. I've worked for them in the past. The point I was trying to make is that Microsoft has done at least one thing right with.NET, and that is offer several official, or at least, semi-official languages for it, unlike Sun who refuses to acknowledge that anything other than Java (language) will run on the Java Runtime Environment.
It did actually, despite what Microsoft, the Slashbots and the Linux (and Windows) press would have you believe. There are millions of Java developers across the world, there are billions of devices from phones to high-end servers running Java. The number is growing despite what the Redmond Marketting Machine tells you. Even IBM likes Java.
As long as Microsoft publishes API documentation there's nothing they can do to stop someone from implementing an equivalent class (as ECMA-standardized.NET CLR bytecode) by simply following the API documentation.
Until they come across something covered by a patent.
This is more paranoid Slashdotter ranting.
Maybe. It might also be someone trying to put the other side of the story, and to explore some of the issues that people are quick to gloss over.
Even the wildest rant may contain a grain of truth, or may spark a thought. We must encourage free and open discussion, for without it society will be come a morose, stagnant, rotting, festering pile of apology, conformity and subserviance.
Not necessarily. People have targetted other languages for the Java runtime, including Python (Jython) and Scheme (Kawa). Basically, as long as you can spit out Java bytecode it doesn't matter language what you compiled to get it.
I hear what you say. It's just that Sun doesn't advertise this fact for some reason, and we don't tend to hear much about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe, maybe not. I though for a horrible moment that Linus and friends were saying, "we don't care about code stability any more, let's leave that to RedHat." When they talk about "the distributions" they mean RedHat. In corporate America Linux==RedHat. That would leave all other distributions behind. Effectively, everyone else would be waiting for RedHat to submit their patches. There would be forking of the kernel. Us v.s Them and all that.
I just think it's a bit gung-ho chucking new stuff in the mainline kernel. You don't have to use devfs in any 2.4 or 2.6 kernel. You don't have to chose it as an option at compile time. That's why I think it wasn't a good example to chose and a non-issue. From my point of view, I don't care whether devfs goes away in 2.4.28, 2.6.99 or 2.8.10, I don't compile it it.
OK then. I take your point. Linux has now become useless to me. It's going to be in a perpetual state of flux, even in the "stable" tree, with whatever unforseen problems that creates.
Now here this slashdot: I give up. I'm going to buy a Mac.
Goodbye.
It comes with no warantee
In the hope that it might be useful.
Plus, what feature or bugfix have you needed that required a brand new kernel?
Bug and security fixes mainly.
It was not the latest at the time and I did not upgrade to 2.2 until I've heard reports that it was stable.
Well I've not long upgraded to 2.4 (about a year). I held out till they put a stable VM in. I needed the extra hardware support, otherwise I'd have stayed on 2.2.
My 486sx runs 2.2. I also have two K6-2s, 2 P-IIs, and various other odds and ends. They don't run "development" kernels, only mature, stable ones.
I'm not a kernel developer, so I don't want to spend all night debugging. I get my distro from Slackware (yes, I've parted with money).
Actually, I do, and I often compile applications from source as well.
Why is it that so many people believe it is their RIGHT to be able to muck around with core of an OS
That's the whole damned point of Free Software: Freedom!
hey probably wouldn't do it with the sources of XFree86, KDE and GNOME?
I've compiled X from scratch once or twice, and pottered around with parts of GNOME that needed upgrading for various reasons. I don't use KDE. I've also tried various other things, usually under development. I'm not scared.
"Active development going on" often results in "no worky" whether by accident or design. Look at the 2.4 kernel and all the VM trouble, for example.
Why not keep the even number for "no active development" and put the development into the odd number with only bug and security fixes in "stable"?
Maybe I'm getting old or something, but what they have ain't broken. They just need to be more rigorous in their application of their own rules.
I'm a Slakware man myself, but I don't like sitting around waiting for Patrick to make a new kernel. I like to update my kernel myself from the official Linus tarball as and when required. This will no longer be possible.
Microsoft, Apple and Sun will be falling over themselves with laughter when they see this. Linux's legendary stability will go down the pan, and people will leave in droves. Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer especially will make great capital out of this.
In England, secondary school lasts either 5 years or 7 depending on whether you take A-Levels. In Scotland, secondary school lasts either 4, 5 or 6 years depending on which exams you take, and how old you are (you can not leave until you are 16 or there abouts). Things are changing in the Scottsh system these days. It's all different to when I left 12 years ago.
If only it were so easy. Decisions about IT in schools are usually out of the hands of the teachers and the teachers have very little say. My mother is head of a business studies department in a Scottish school. It's amazing the kind of rubbish they have to use and put up with. You will find it very difficult to effect change from the grass roots. Someone higher up the educational food chain, usually at school governor level or above, needs to know someone who works for someone who knows about these things in an official capacity. For example, if you were the head teacher of the school or a governor or someone high up in the local education authority who knew someone who was high up in an IT company you might get listened to. Believe me, we've been chipping away from the low end for years...
OpenBIOS is what you want, and unlike LinuxBIOS, it's implementing an Open Standard too, as used by IBM, Apple and Sun : IEEE 1275-1994 or Open Firmware.
It's only them and HP in it now. HP is going to intel's Opteron clone, and SGI revived MIPS development. I've no doubt we'll see Opteron/Linux machines from SGI sooner or later.
It'a all the fault of the 1960's now.
Thanks for that. It was absolutely superb. I am currently picking mushy pieces of half-eaten chicken sandwiches from my keyboard.
"Dee flat" works for me :-)
A: One is secure, reliable, mature, scalable, portable and ubiquitous with an installed base in the billions and a developer community in the millions with thousands of open source code programs written in it. The other is called C#.
Argh! A BASIC programmer! In English there is no such word as "goto." :-)
If you're paying...
With reasoning a sound as that, you should consider a career in tabloid journalism or local radio.
I've got plenty already thanks.
I know what stupid PHBs will do. I've worked for them in the past. The point I was trying to make is that Microsoft has done at least one thing right with .NET, and that is offer several official, or at least, semi-official languages for it, unlike Sun who refuses to acknowledge that anything other than Java (language) will run on the Java Runtime Environment.
It did actually, despite what Microsoft, the Slashbots and the Linux (and Windows) press would have you believe. There are millions of Java developers across the world, there are billions of devices from phones to high-end servers running Java. The number is growing despite what the Redmond Marketting Machine tells you. Even IBM likes Java.
And my point was that you can have many types of executables. Scripts can be executable too.
Different projects may like to use different languages but to target the same VM.
Until they come across something covered by a patent.
This is more paranoid Slashdotter ranting.
Maybe. It might also be someone trying to put the other side of the story, and to explore some of the issues that people are quick to gloss over.
Even the wildest rant may contain a grain of truth, or may spark a thought. We must encourage free and open discussion, for without it society will be come a morose, stagnant, rotting, festering pile of apology, conformity and subserviance.
I hear what you say. It's just that Sun doesn't advertise this fact for some reason, and we don't tend to hear much about it.