Haha, that reminds me when I was with my dad when he bought a new computer;
Originally Posted by RealNC
PC_store_owner: "Hello. How can I help you?"
Dad: "I'm in the market for a new computer."
PC_store_owner: "Well we have bla bla bla"
Dad: "Just give me the best of the best computer you have"
PC_store_owner: "OK, the best computer we have here has x, y, z and a ten megabyte harddisk."
Dad: "Ten megabytes, is this the best of the best?"
PC_store_onwer: "Sir, ten... megabyte. You'll never get to fill it up".
Yeah, like... "640K ought to be enough for anybody." - Bill Gates, 1981
Originally Posted by V!NCENT
Well at the time 640K really was enough for anybody.
there is some drama... eh discussion in the mailing list and people (including Torvalds) referred to the phoronix forums
i just want to say:
Hi kernelz peoples. Thanks for the codes and shit :D:D
I think it's good that more advanced stuff requires non-trivial methods. It acts as an implicit safety net so clueless users don't screw up their system.
Originally Posted by unimatrix
OT, interesting stuff...
I haven't read much about the difference between this and BFS (which I only came across the first time while playing around with PCLinuxOS), might have to look that up to get rid of that annoying "double work" impression.
For the interested people who don't want to patch kernel, you can achieve basically the same behaviour by editing your .bashrc like described in this link: http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/11/16/413
Am I the only one who thinks it's funny how Lennart and Linus fight because they both had basically the same ideas at kinda the same time?!
Even though it's more about how this is best implemented. But actually the beast linux sees in userspace already exists with systemd so I would suppose on midterm using systemd is the better idea. (I'm using it on my experimental box and its incredible)
Maybe Kernel devs and systemd devs could work together on this one to provide the data needed from the kernel to do this in userspace.
The implementation now really isn't suitable for every use case since it only takes tty's into account.
Will someone *please* *pretty* *please* provide a ppa?...........:D
it just fails to compile with this patch, i tried vanilla kernel 2.6.36, 2.6.37-rc2 and git, and even tried to compile it using rpmbuild, but the error is always the same:
kernel/built-in.o: In function `__put_task_struct':
(.text+0xb1c9): undefined reference to `sched_autogroup_exit'
kernel/built-in.o: In function `copy_process':
fork.c:(.text+0xc042): undefined reference to `sched_autogroup_fork'
kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0xe28): undefined reference to `sysctl_sched_autogroup_enabled'
drivers/built-in.o: In function `__proc_set_tty':
tty_io.c:(.text+0x76486): undefined reference to `sched_autogroup_create_attach'
user liquorix, already updated with the patch XD
Originally Posted by dasen
just add the debian sid line that works perfectly in ubuntu so far
Yeah... very much appreciated! I have a feeling this will be one of the most important and talked about patches in the last years :D
Originally Posted by 89c51