Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Huge Disaster Within The Linux 2.6.35 Kernel

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127534862110443&w=2
    and
    http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127535359014939&w=2

    to quote:
    > What I really don't get is why they didn't talk to people on
    > linux-kernel before posting those claims on phoronix. :S

    Well thats kinda obvious, its "journalism" in the days of google
    adwords. They make revenue by making people click on their website,
    they don't make money being useful or interacting with others.
    Phoronix in all the years I've been dealing with them as the only
    place doing any reporting on graphics, have never once confirmed a
    source, asked for information directly or anything you'd expect from
    real journalists, again because that doesn't drive page hits, whereas
    sensationalist useless headlines are the main point of the site.

    Comment


    • A more journalistic approach would've been to share the problem with linux-kernel, and then write up in detail how it got fixed - along the way describing select(), udev, and how some of the kernel mechanisms worked. Enough of those articles and interested regular readers would know much more about the kernel and a couple of new kernel hackers might be on their way up

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Chad Page View Post
        A more journalistic approach would've been to share the problem with linux-kernel, and then write up in detail how it got fixed - along the way describing select(), udev, and how some of the kernel mechanisms worked. Enough of those articles and interested regular readers would know much more about the kernel and a couple of new kernel hackers might be on their way up
        If more readers actually became Premium subscribers or did not use AdBlock, it might actually be possible, but until then it's not as there simply are not the needed resources.
        Michael Larabel
        http://www.michaellarabel.com/

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Michael View Post
          If more readers actually became Premium subscribers or did not use AdBlock, it might actually be possible, but until then it's not as there simply are not the needed resources.
          Ahh, the chicken & egg problem.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Michael View Post
            If more readers actually became Premium subscribers or did not use AdBlock, it might actually be possible, but until then it's not as there simply are not the needed resources.
            Do you get paid for views, or just click throughs? Also does the site have moving ads or text only?

            If it's text only views I'll happily turn off ad block here. If it's flashing/moving flash ads, and only click throughs there isn't much difference between me with adblock and me with out is minimal, and more likely to drive me away from the site. Actually, even it was click throughs and it was text only I would make a point to open one in a new tab. Yes the moving flash ads are that annoying. To be fair it's not that I have even looked, I simply block all ads by default. In some respects it is advertisers that are to blame. Targeted text ads for linux/FOSS things would be at least relevant.

            The other reason people block ads is that flash ads, are a security risk. There have been many cases of people getting infected by "drive-bys" because of a flash ad, or any other picture based ad. If I recall correctly there was a point in time where Firefox had a jpeg exploit.

            Comment


            • Most ads are for page views. There's text and graphical ads. Simple text ads don't really produce a lot of revenue.
              Michael Larabel
              http://www.michaellarabel.com/

              Comment


              • Originally posted by sabriah View Post
                When I looked at http://www.phoromatic.com/kernel-tracker.php a few minutes ago there was no improvement yet, and the latest date was 2010-05-30, with 5% threshold. Phoromatic chugs along, relentlessly.
                When I looked at http://www.phoromatic.com/kernel-tracker.php a few minutes ago there was no improvement yet, and the latest date was 2010-06-01, with 5% threshold. Phoromatic chugs along, relentlessly.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by sabriah View Post
                  When I looked at http://www.phoromatic.com/kernel-tracker.php a few minutes ago there was no improvement yet, and the latest date was 2010-06-01, with 5% threshold. Phoromatic chugs along, relentlessly.
                  The only caveat there is that the Ubuntu kernel daily builds have stopped.

                  http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/daily/

                  A new daily build arrived today, so we'll see if the regression has been fixed.

                  The way Phoromatic trackers currently work is just pickup the most recent daily build. So if there is no updated build it will re-use the most recent.

                  Regards,

                  Matthew

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by mtippett View Post
                    The only caveat there is that the Ubuntu kernel daily builds have stopped.
                    Ubuntu kernels?????? phormaix uses Ubuntu kernels? I think that makes the whole thing even less useful.
                    Are you sure you don't want to use plain mainline?

                    Comment


                    • Doesn't it build kernel from git every day ? I thought so :/ .

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Elyotna View Post
                        Doesn't it build kernel from git every day ? I thought so :/ .
                        Hmmm, that is what I presumed too.

                        It wouldn't surprise me if Ubuntu applies "in-house" patches which would make it even more difficult to trace regressions for the uninitiated.

                        While it may be good for Ubuntu-folks, it does limit its general use elsewhere. And, the dates of their builds probably don't match the builds of the plain vanilla builds.

                        While I think the concept is excellent I think a plain vanilla kernel from git is the optimal way to go. My 2c.

                        Comment


                        • whenever I reported bugs in the past I always made sure I would use an unpatched kernel.org kernel. That way you don't introduce another layer of potential bugs.
                          If phoronix uses ubuntu kernels for this the article is even less worth than before.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by energyman View Post
                            whenever I reported bugs in the past I always made sure I would use an unpatched kernel.org kernel. That way you don't introduce another layer of potential bugs.
                            If phoronix uses ubuntu kernels for this the article is even less worth than before.
                            ^^ Truth.
                            I was lead to believe that this was "vanilla" git kernels that were being tested, not some version of the kernel with ubuntu backporting/foreward porting a ton of stuff to. I will blame ubuntu until the same problem is shown with vanilla packages all around(udev, kernel, gcc, ffmpeg, etc). If it's not a problem with current stable/testing/experimental vanilla packages, the blame is on the distro of choice, 99% of the time. Yes i have a problem with ubuntu, and to a lesser extent redhat/fedora and suse for "patching" packages in incompatible ways.

                            Reminds me of the old Suse7/8/9 redhat7/7.3/8 days, where a vanilla kernel wouldn't boot, because the init scripts depended on some feature that didn't exist in "vanilla".

                            Originally posted by Michael
                            Most ads are for page views. There's text and graphical ads. Simple text ads don't really produce a lot of revenue.
                            Some ad views are better than none no? I used to use adblock and add my own rules, but that just got to be too much, even after i switched to "*.domain.org/*" in it if your ad moved or was flash based. Then easylist came about and i never went back.

                            Comment


                            • It's the mainline PPA packages being tested, not with Ubuntu's backporting mess and other cruft.
                              Michael Larabel
                              http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by cynyr View Post
                                Some ad views are better than none no? I used to use adblock and add my own rules, but that just got to be too much, even after i switched to "*.domain.org/*" in it if your ad moved or was flash based. Then easylist came about and i never went back.
                                Not if it still leads to a loss in ad revenue. Even if the impression count was tripled over current figures, but all ads were only text-based, it still would lead to a loss. Such ads simply don't pay well.
                                Michael Larabel
                                http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X