I think expressing my own opinion about Lennart-made software is my
right, after all.
Firstly, it's almost impossible nowadays to avoid including avahi,
systemd and pulseaudio into a desktop distro so, there is no real
choice. This issue became a sensible matter for those users who for
instance, wanted to have a silly mp3 player working without going
through the PA nonsense, really missing the old
ALSA-oh-it-was-always-working days.
If you want to bring complexity but you end up not being able to
handle it, then you're not a really good engineer, IMHO.
Having said that, I also wonder where's the lovely modularity the
various *nix platforms had. If this is the actual direction of Linux
Foundation, Redhat and Canonical, I am worried that Linux would end up
being an OSX-wannabe.
Of course, I am not only bringing my personal opinion here, but the
one of the majority of users I've been talking with.
I am not against changes, I am actually in favor of them, but only
when they really make sense and solve problems, which it doesn't seem
the case lately.
I didn't want to offend anyone, but just having fun (sigh) of IMHO bad
design decisions.
--
Fabio Erculiani
05-10-2012, 08:07 AM
Arch Website Notification
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 0 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 7 packages missing signoffs
* 1 package older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (2 total) ==
== All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (1 total) ==
* vicious-2.0.4-2 (any), since 2012-04-17
== Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==
05-10-2012, 08:07 AM
Arch Website Notification
=== Signoff report for [testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 0 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 4 fully signed off packages
* 9 packages missing signoffs
* 4 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (4 total) ==
* xorg-server-1.12.1-2 (i686), since 2012-04-15
* xorg-server-1.12.1-2 (x86_64), since 2012-04-15
* xf86-video-ati-6.14.4-4 (i686), since 2012-04-15
* xf86-video-ati-6.14.4-4 (x86_64), since 2012-04-15
== Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==
05-10-2012, 01:54 PM
Vivek Goyal
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 11:07:29PM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> bcache: a cache for arbitrary block devices using an SSD.
>
> Short overview:
> Bcache does both writethrough and writeback caching. It presents itself as a
> new block device, a bit like say md. You can cache an arbitrary number of
> block devices with a single cache device, and attach and detach things at
> runtime - it's quite flexible.
So it is still not a device mapper target. I somehow had the impression
that consensus at LSF was to convert it into a device mapper target.
Thanks
Vivek
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
05-10-2012, 02:39 PM
Zac Medico
On 05/10/2012 04:44 AM, ChÃ*-Thanh Christopher Nguyá»…n wrote:
> Greg KH schrieb:
>> No one forces you to use any of this software if you do not want to.
>> There are lots of other operating systems out there, feel free to switch
>> to them if you do not like the way this one is working out, no one is
>> stopping you. But for you to disparage someone who has given immense
>> bodies of work to the community, and you, for free, is horrible behavior
>> and needs to stop right now.
>
> Insulting other people is indeed not nice. A borderline statement would
> be the "card-carrying member of the Poettering gang" which was coined by
> a well-known kernel developer who shall remain unnamed here.
> But using harsh words to describe other people's software? C'mon.
Specific criticism's can be be constructive, but calling PulseAudio a
name like FailAudio certainly isn't. I'd enjoy reading this thread a lot
more if it contained more discussion about solutions, and less of what
seems like whining due to self-pity.
--
Thanks,
Zac
05-10-2012, 03:03 PM
Vivek Goyal
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 11:07:29PM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
[..]
> The userspace interface is going to change before it goes in. The general
> consensus at LSF was that we don't want yet another interface for
> probing/managing block devices, and dm exists so we may as well use that. I
> don't think anyone's started on that yet, though.
>
Ok, I missed above lines and was pointed to it. So idea of this posting is
to review core changes and then somebody else needs to take the core, wrap
it with dm apis and repost?
Thanks
Vivek
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
05-10-2012, 03:34 PM
Kent Overstreet
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 11:07:29PM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
>
> [..]
>> The userspace interface is going to change before it goes in. The general
>> consensus at LSF was that we don't want yet another interface for
>> probing/managing block devices, and dm exists so we may as well use that. I
>> don't think anyone's started on that yet, though.
>>
>
> Ok, I missed above lines and was pointed to it. So idea of this posting is
> to review core changes and then somebody else needs to take the core, wrap
> it with dm apis and repost?
More or less - I'm not sure who's going to be doing the dm integration
work (I honestly don't have time), but it's not been forgotten. But
there's other stuff that needs review in the meantime.
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
05-10-2012, 04:54 PM
Olivier Crête
Hi,
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 06:34 +0200, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
> I think expressing my own opinion about Lennart-made software is my
> right, after all.
I would express my opinion about Fabio made software, but I've never
heard of any.
> Firstly, it's almost impossible nowadays to avoid including avahi,
> systemd and pulseaudio into a desktop distro so, there is no real
> choice. This issue became a sensible matter for those users who for
> instance, wanted to have a silly mp3 player working without going
> through the PA nonsense, really missing the old
> ALSA-oh-it-was-always-working days.
Maybe the reason every sensible distribution uses Avahi, Pulseaudio, etc
is because they are better than other solutions out there?
Do you think is a fast conspiracy to make your life suck? I believe
engineers in every distribution are looking at what's available and
picking what they think is the best solution, and it turns out Lennart
is pretty damn good at making useful software.
Was alsa always working? I remember spending hours trying to figure out
the right control in alsamixer and fighting with alsa's arcane
configuration languages (it has 3 different ones). And how do you deal
with modern technologies like Bluetooth audio without Pulseaudio
exactly?
> Of course, I am not only bringing my personal opinion here, but the
> one of the majority of users I've been talking with.
I think you only hear from users who like to complain, others are just
happy that everything works for them thanks to Pulseaudio, systemd, etc.
If you think that Lennart does not solve problems, maybe it's because
you don't even understand what the problems were? For example, I
encourage you to read about how the dynamic latency in PA allows for
lower power usage or how modern audio hardware is designed to use a
userspace sound server, etc.
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@google.com> wrote:
> bcache: a cache for arbitrary block devices using an SSD.
>
> Short overview:
> Bcache does both writethrough and writeback caching. It presents itself as a
> new block device, a bit like say md. You can cache an arbitrary number of
> block devices with a single cache device, and attach and detach things at
> runtime - it's quite flexible.
>
> It's very fast. It uses a b+ tree for the index, along with a journal to
> coalesce index updates, and a bunch of other cool tricks like auxiliary binary
> search trees with software floating point keys for searching within btree
> nodes.
>
> Bcache is solid, production ready code. There are still bugs being found that
> affect specific configurations, but there haven't been any major issues found
> in awhile - it's well past time I started working on getting it into mainline.
>
> It's a lot of code - I tried to split it out so that it'd make some sort of
> sense for reviewing. Let me know if there's anything else I can do to make
> review easier.
>
> TODO/known issues:
>
> __up_write() needs to be exported for bcache to compile as a module - it's
> used for bypassing lockdep when traversing the btree during garbage
> collection. If someone else knows a better solution, please let me know.
>
> The userspace interface is going to change before it goes in. The general
> consensus at LSF was that we don't want yet another interface for
> probing/managing block devices, and dm exists so we may as well use that. I
> don't think anyone's started on that yet, though.
Might as well mention I've started work on a md conversion. Nearing
the point of having RFC patches ready to post.
I'm doing it in such a way that it does not preclude a dm target from
coming along as well. Like I mentioned to Alasdair at LSF, there's no
reason this could not be treated the same as the shared raid
personalities between dm and md.
--
Dan
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
05-10-2012, 06:57 PM
David Leverton
Greg KH wrote:
No one forces you to use any of this software if you do not want to.
There are lots of other operating systems out there, feel free to switch
to them if you do not like the way this one is working out, no one is
stopping you.
Or alternatively, the people who hate Unix could move to some other OS
that suites them better, rather than trying to destroy what everyone
else is perfectly happy with.
