FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 09-27-2011, 06:33 PM
Michael Mol
 
Default Slightly OT but interesting nonetheless...

On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Michael Mol <mikemol@gmail.com> wrote:
> <SNIP>
>>
>> Because, in this case, the hardware, which is unreplaceable, went tits
>> up. Meaning it no longer works. It can't be replaced, and they're SOL
>> until they get the software ported forward. Their remaining hardware
>> of the same vintage had already died on them, and they didn't have any
>> migration path or hedge set up.
>>
>> Other reasons--and this is why I *loathe* unnuanced "if it works,
>> don't touch it" mentalities--include security updates and migration
>> difficulty in the event of *necessity* of upgrades.
>>
>
> I sympathize with the hardware dieing, but one could argue (IMHO
> anyway) that that is as much a management problem on their part, or
> those supporting them, as it is an issue with the kernel. If someone
> is running a system which is critical and isn't planing for how to get
> new copies of the system or move forward to new hardware over time,
> then they are painted into a corner.

I fully concur.

IME, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" is a large underlying driver
for how people paint themselves into those corners. Management's (and
a terribly high number of sysadmins') definition of 'broke' doesn't
include 'can I recover if it gets hit by lightning tomorrow?'

>
> I can pretty much promise you that one area likely to get LOTS of
> attention in this kernel series IS security updates, at least if they
> are kernel based security issues. That a major reason, if not the #1
> reason, that this series of kernels exists.

And I think that's excellent; I wasn't even aware of them until today.

--
:wq
 
Old 09-27-2011, 06:41 PM
Mark Knecht
 
Default Slightly OT but interesting nonetheless...

On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Michael Mol <mikemol@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
>> I can pretty much promise you that one area likely to get LOTS of
>> attention in this kernel series IS security updates, at least if they
>> are kernel based security issues. That a major reason, if not the #1
>> reason, that this series of kernels exists.
>
> And I think that's excellent; I wasn't even aware of them until today.
>

I understand you weren't aware so I'm just trying to gently help you
and others understand why this series exists.

If you read through the requirements for submitting patches to the
long term stable series one point is that an identical/similar patch
must exist in the development tree. For security issues those are
addressed pretty quickly, and as long as the code works in the earlier
code it's conceptually pretty easy for someone to get it included in
the long term series. Of course, I'm not a developer so I don't know
what is _really_ required, but conceptually it's doable.

Cheers,
Mark
 
Old 09-28-2011, 02:44 PM
James
 
Default Slightly OT but interesting nonetheless...

Volker Armin Hemmann <volkerarmin <at> googlemail.com> writes:


> > > Breaking the user experience in order to ???fix??? something
> > > is a totally broken concept; you cannot do it.

> > That's hilarious.

> > The Linux developers are _constantly_ changing APIs in ways that break
> > existing device driver code. There are repeatedly wholesale
> > re-designs of some APIs that happen between minor versions of a
> > supposedly "stable" kernel.

> which is seriously not a problem and does not matter in the slightest.

Some perspective may ease the pain here. Folks on this list are focused
on *their personal pain*. Welcome to unix/bsd/linux. (too many decades now)
No pain, no gain. Gui experiences are what consumers see, feel and purchase;
so Volker is very right here.

The kernel gyrations are all really about something much more important.
*MONEY*

Just think about it, on this list in the last few months, we have discussed
how the stock market runs on linux, Some folks use GPU + CPU for very
advanced things, Commercial distros like Apple's offering are making
billions. Android. (on and on). The point is the Linux Kernel is
the battle ground for software deployment, particularly firmware.
An infinite number of "user experiences"
can be packaged and sold on top of the Linux kernel.

Here's another one: Carrier Grade Linux (runs most of the worlds communications
systems, including most carrier grade cisco gear. Most legacy comm system
at some point now, get boosted on top of private IP networks run by the
carriers (or military). Cisco recommends embedded linux on their carrier
switches and IOS is an unmanaged *hacked* pig, with little future.


The "gymnastics" about the kernel and drivers are the public manifestation
of a much deeper battle for embedded systems supremacy using linux. Wind River,
unquestionable the largest commercial offering of embedded solutions
has products based on both bsd and linux kernels. In "ka-hoots" with
chip vendors they routinely offer "enhanced" drivers to companies that
build products, with features never to found in the linux published
sources. Binaries are available and yet clearly violate the spirit
of the whole (whore) open source movement. WHY? *MONEY*. Governments
and miltaries also feed at this trough. Linus would have his tits
slapped together, if he every interfered with these industries.
He in only in charge of the gyrations....

Tons of products still use embedded linux for the 2.4 kernel series.
They opt out of the 2.6 gyrations. Many companies put forward their best
technologies, in order to gain "mind-share" in the kernel wars.

Companies build very large data base systems, using the latest technologies
that work with the linux kernel. Often these technologies only appear
for the masses, years after companies use a "in house" version as
the key pillar for commercial success (MONEY).

Take for example the company that does backups for one of the worlds largest
and most complicated database needs. The good old US ARMY.
They use linux, the latest open source databases and the newest
file systems like CEPHS, yet they are years away from public consumption.
Well financed companies are buying up the young (phd) experts whom
have hack out versions and code that makes CEPH usable. Billions of dollars
are being made and it's a real threat to Oracle. Customizations
of low level drivers in the latest linux kernel are the key, and
much of that work will not even be introduced to the linux kernel
community..........TOO MUCH MONEY AT STAKE!

(and you wonder why Oracle hates linux?)

The linux kernel is a malaise of brilliant folks that are key components
in thousands of billion dollar schemes for a wide variety of embedded
and distributed products (thinks corporation profits).

What amazes me if that we get any real progress on the kernel at all.
Only enough to keep technical folks in love with linux, but not
disturb the billion dollar industries, all jocking for position
around the kernel and drivers. So when things are murky, just
realize there is most likely several divergent financial interests
jocking for position behind those public gyrations.....



> They NEVER change user-space APIs and ABIs in incompatible ways. THAT is
> important.
> > We have to touch our NetBSD and FreeBSD drivers maybe once every 3-4
> > years.
> and look how much devices they drive - because nobody has to send their
> drivers upstream, nobody does.

Because embedded BSD, although still viable, does not have mindshare
any more. Most do not care. The battle it to spin your version
of embedded linux, and sell it to the product manufacturers.


> > Often our Linux drivers have to be updated every 3-4 _months_
> > to keep up with changes in the kernel that break things.
> which is your own fucking fault.
> Get your drivers into the kernel. Problem solved.

Volker is right, again. However, this is where the true
fun begins, particularly when an innovative startup
looks to gain market share in an area where other
have made lots of money. Many drivers, not thought
to be strategic, have little issue. Some vendors,
Motorola comes to mind, put one driver into the kernel
and offer another quietly through vendors or
directly. Many Chipsets have always had "secret hardware features"
and the ability to use those features is still a well guarded
secret and costs tons of money and is often limited to
who can use those chipsets. There are some NDA, if you
violate, your ass is dead.

Linus a "showboat" and making some serious cash, keeping
the public focused on linux (mindshare) and playing
as puppet as the big boys joust behind the scenes. From a
modeling point of view, the gyrations of the linux kernel,
chipset's hidden features and the device driver delusions
are very much akin to what is going on in the hacker
(interloper) world. The hilarious twist is the kernel
game is controlled by globalist. Hacking is everybody's
economic playground.

Why Greg even offers to develop drivers free for folks,
yet hardly any corporations take him up on this generous
offer?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Kroah-Hartman
http://kerneltrap.org/node/7636


Common it's all about *MONEY* The rest is just smoke, mirrors
and BULLSHIT....

hth,
James
 
Old 09-28-2011, 04:54 PM
Volker Armin Hemmann
 
Default Slightly OT but interesting nonetheless...

Am Mittwoch 28 September 2011, 14:44:06 schrieb James:
> Volker Armin Hemmann <volkerarmin <at> googlemail.com> writes:
> > > > Breaking the user experience in order to ???fix??? something
> > > > is a totally broken concept; you cannot do it.
> > >
> > > That's hilarious.
> > >
> > > The Linux developers are _constantly_ changing APIs in ways that
> > > break
> > > existing device driver code. There are repeatedly wholesale
> > > re-designs of some APIs that happen between minor versions of a
> > > supposedly "stable" kernel.
> >
> > which is seriously not a problem and does not matter in the slightest.
>
> Some perspective may ease the pain here. Folks on this list are focused
> on *their personal pain*. Welcome to unix/bsd/linux. (too many decades now)
> No pain, no gain. Gui experiences are what consumers see, feel and purchase;
> so Volker is very right here.
>
> The kernel gyrations are all really about something much more important.
> *MONEY*

well, if you make money with linux, their are many choices for you. Nobody
forces you to target the latest kernel. You can always go with one of the many
stable releases out there. Look them up.

>
> Just think about it, on this list in the last few months, we have discussed
> how the stock market runs on linux, Some folks use GPU + CPU for very
> advanced things, Commercial distros like Apple's offering are making
> billions. Android. (on and on). The point is the Linux Kernel is
> the battle ground for software deployment, particularly firmware.
> An infinite number of "user experiences"
> can be packaged and sold on top of the Linux kernel.

so what? what does this have to do with linux changing internal apis that are
not supposed to be public? (hint: nothing)

>
> Here's another one: Carrier Grade Linux (runs most of the worlds
> communications systems, including most carrier grade cisco gear. Most
> legacy comm system at some point now, get boosted on top of private IP
> networks run by the carriers (or military). Cisco recommends embedded linux
> on their carrier switches and IOS is an unmanaged *hacked* pig, with little
> future.

see above

>
>
> The "gymnastics" about the kernel and drivers are the public manifestation
> of a much deeper battle for embedded systems supremacy using linux. Wind
> River, unquestionable the largest commercial offering of embedded solutions
> has products based on both bsd and linux kernels. In "ka-hoots" with chip
> vendors they routinely offer "enhanced" drivers to companies that build
> products, with features never to found in the linux published sources.
> Binaries are available and yet clearly violate the spirit of the whole
> (whore) open source movement. WHY? *MONEY*. Governments and miltaries also
> feed at this trough. Linus would have his tits
> slapped together, if he every interfered with these industries.
> He in only in charge of the gyrations....
>

tell that yourself to make you happy.

> Tons of products still use embedded linux for the 2.4 kernel series.

and there are even products with 2.2 kernels. What does that prove? Nothing?


> Companies build very large data base systems, using the latest technologies
> that work with the linux kernel. Often these technologies only appear
> for the masses, years after companies use a "in house" version as
> the key pillar for commercial success (MONEY).

and again, what does that have to do with internal api changes?

>
> Take for example the company that does backups for one of the worlds largest
> and most complicated database needs. The good old US ARMY.
> They use linux, the latest open source databases and the newest
> file systems like CEPHS, yet they are years away from public consumption.
> Well financed companies are buying up the young (phd) experts whom
> have hack out versions and code that makes CEPH usable. Billions of dollars
> are being made and it's a real threat to Oracle. Customizations
> of low level drivers in the latest linux kernel are the key, and
> much of that work will not even be introduced to the linux kernel
> community..........TOO MUCH MONEY AT STAKE!

see above.

>
> (and you wonder why Oracle hates linux?)

yeah, they really must hate linux. One of the first databases running on it,
sponsoring btrfs etc pp. That is hate.

>
> What amazes me if that we get any real progress on the kernel at all.

not me. Because keeping internal apis backwards compatible for some out-of-
tree code is a sure way to go down the drain.


> > They NEVER change user-space APIs and ABIs in incompatible ways. THAT is
> > important.
> >
> > > We have to touch our NetBSD and FreeBSD drivers maybe once every 3-4
> > > years.
> >
> > and look how much devices they drive - because nobody has to send their
> > drivers upstream, nobody does.
>
> Because embedded BSD, although still viable, does not have mindshare
> any more. Most do not care. The battle it to spin your version
> of embedded linux, and sell it to the product manufacturers.

and thanks to that mindset BSDs are pretty much stagnant. Think about it..

>
> > > Often our Linux drivers have to be updated every 3-4 _months_
> > > to keep up with changes in the kernel that break things.
> >
> > which is your own fucking fault.
> > Get your drivers into the kernel. Problem solved.
>
> Volker is right, again. However, this is where the true
> fun begins, particularly when an innovative startup
> looks to gain market share in an area where other
> have made lots of money. Many drivers, not thought
> to be strategic, have little issue. Some vendors,
> Motorola comes to mind, put one driver into the kernel
> and offer another quietly through vendors or
> directly. Many Chipsets have always had "secret hardware features"
> and the ability to use those features is still a well guarded
> secret and costs tons of money and is often limited to
> who can use those chipsets. There are some NDA, if you
> violate, your ass is dead.
>
> Linus a "showboat" and making some serious cash, keeping
> the public focused on linux (mindshare) and playing
> as puppet as the big boys joust behind the scenes.

question: do you think the moon landings were fake too?

> From a
> modeling point of view, the gyrations of the linux kernel,
> chipset's hidden features and the device driver delusions
> are very much akin to what is going on in the hacker
> (interloper) world. The hilarious twist is the kernel
> game is controlled by globalist. Hacking is everybody's
> economic playground.
>
> Why Greg even offers to develop drivers free for folks,
> yet hardly any corporations take him up on this generous
> offer?

because they are scared for their precious 'ip' not realizing that most of it
is well known by their competition anyway.

>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Kroah-Hartman
> http://kerneltrap.org/node/7636
>
>
> Common it's all about *MONEY* The rest is just smoke, mirrors
> and BULLSHIT....

you must know it...

>
> hth,
> James
--
#163933
 
Old 09-28-2011, 05:15 PM
Grant Edwards
 
Default Slightly OT but interesting nonetheless...

On 2011-09-27, Volker Armin Hemmann <volkerarmin@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Am Montag 26 September 2011, 20:13:53 schrieb Grant Edwards:
>> On 2011-09-26, Michael Mol <mikemol@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:37 PM, pk <peterk2@coolmail.se> wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Happened upon this interview with Linus Torvalds that some of you
>> >> might
>> >> find interesting (if you haven't seen it already):
>> >>
>> >> http://h30565.www3.hp.com/t5/Feature-Articles/Linus-Torvalds-s-Lessons
>> >> -on-Software-Development-Management/ba-p/440>
>> > Yeah, I just saw that. Admittedly, when I saw this section:
>> >
>> > --begin-section--
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > Breaking the user experience in order to ???fix??? something
>> > is a totally broken concept; you cannot do it.
>>
>> That's hilarious.
>>
>> The Linux developers are _constantly_ changing APIs in ways that break
>> existing device driver code. There are repeatedly wholesale
>> re-designs of some APIs that happen between minor versions of a
>> supposedly "stable" kernel.
>
> which is seriously not a problem and does not matter in the
> slightest.

That depends on whether you have to maintain Linux drivers or not.

Regardless, my point was that Linus's statement that it's unacceptable
to break things seemed rather disingenuous given the API churn that
Linux has compared with the BSD kernels.

> They NEVER change user-space APIs and ABIs in incompatible ways. THAT is
> important.

Indeed, that's very important.

>> Often our Linux drivers have to be updated every 3-4 _months_
>> to keep up with changes in the kernel that break things.
>
> which is your own fucking fault.
>
> Get your drivers into the kernel. Problem solved.

We tried that approach. It didn't work -- it just generates a lot
more work.

--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Did an Italian CRANE
at OPERATOR just experience
gmail.com uninhibited sensations in
a MALIBU HOT TUB?
 
Old 09-29-2011, 12:27 AM
Peter Humphrey
 
Default Slightly OT but interesting nonetheless...

On Tuesday 27 September 2011 17:52:24 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:




> which is your own fucking fault.

>

> Get your drivers into the kernel. Problem solved.




Does gratuitous obscenity come naturally to you, or do you have to work at it?




--

Rgds

Peter Linux Counter 5290, 1994-04-23
 
Old 09-29-2011, 01:10 PM
Indi
 
Default Slightly OT but interesting nonetheless...

On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 02:44:06PM +0000, James wrote:
>
> The kernel gyrations are all really about something much more important.
> *MONEY*
>
> ...Commercial distros like Apple's offering are making
> billions.

OS X is not a linux distribution.
It uses the xnu kernel, which fuses elements of BSD
kernels with the Mach microkernel to create a hybrid.

Also, I think Linus still has a lot of say about kernel
development and last I checked he's not particularly wealthy,
so while there is some merit in what you say (mostly in the
sense that money can buy more developer hours) I don't think
Linux kernel development is "all about the money".

--
caveat utilitor
♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
 
Old 09-29-2011, 04:19 PM
Volker Armin Hemmann
 
Default Slightly OT but interesting nonetheless...

Am Mittwoch 28 September 2011, 17:15:34 schrieb Grant Edwards:

>
> Regardless, my point was that Linus's statement that it's unacceptable
> to break things seemed rather disingenuous given the API churn that
> Linux has compared with the BSD kernels.

Linux has zero userland visible API 'churn'.

You can't have less than zero.

--
#163933
 
Old 09-29-2011, 04:20 PM
Volker Armin Hemmann
 
Default Slightly OT but interesting nonetheless...

Am Donnerstag 29 September 2011, 01:27:27 schrieb Peter Humphrey:
> On Tuesday 27 September 2011 17:52:24 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > which is your own fucking fault.
> >
> > Get your drivers into the kernel. Problem solved.
>
> Does gratuitous obscenity come naturally to you, or do you have to work at
> it?

I am naturally grumpy.

I also have 'bastard' in my passport.

--
#163933
 
Old 09-29-2011, 04:26 PM
 
Default Slightly OT but interesting nonetheless...

Volker Armin Hemmann <volkerarmin@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Linux has zero userland visible API 'churn'.

During what timeframe?

There have been massive Linux API breakages in 2004.

Jrg

--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jrg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:40 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org