A Stable Linux Kernel API/ABI? "The Most Insane Proposal" For Linux Development

[Rubble Monkey]

Nah, he wants a stable kernel where you're free to choose the drivers you wanna run. Right now you either get the latest and often buggiest, or you don't have anything at all. It's not about microkernel vs monolithic kernel.

I see. Whenever anyone talks about moving drivers out of the kernel I usually think of a microkernel.

[wdb974]

I don't give a flying f*ck if it's proprietary or not - as the other 99% of users.

Most people don't care about speaking correctly. That doesn't mean they're right not to.
Most people don't care about using their turning signals. Again, it doesn't mean they're right no to use them.
Most people don't care about all sorts of added chemicals in foods and other products. Doesn't mean they have the right attitude.

Besides, the whole "99% of people think like I do" argument reeks of the "let's hide behind a throng to make my argument appear valid" stench. Nice try, though.

But wait, there's more... If you joined these forums in 2010, then certainly you must at the very least know a couple of things about Linux. Things like getting proper hardware support being highly dependent on either a driver from the manufacturer, or enough documentation for the open source community to make the driver themselves. Failing both, the open source community needs to perform some voodoo (reverse engineering) to get to a viable result.

Bottom line: blame the manufacturers for not releasing a proper driver or proper documentation. And not just that, but also blame yourself for not doing research first. To me, your complaint sounds like someone who goes to rent a movie that's only got Wolof audio and no subs whatsoever, and then who complains they wasted their money because they only speak English.

Now, it's time for you to take a long pause and ponder why your diatribe was met with insults.

[carewolf]

I see. Whenever anyone talks about moving drivers out of the kernel I usually think of a microkernel.

Yes, but one is moving it out of kernel-space the other is moving it out of the kernel sources.

[carewolf]

Yeah, sorry if we don't settle with poor hardware and want to use bleeding-edge, hidg-end hardware. It's MY FAULT. This is the exact mentality why Linux will never succeed on the desktop.

Yep, it is your fault. Try running OS X on it... Oh wait, you can't because Apple has much much worse hardware support than Linux.. Yeah, you need hardware your OS supports. Linux supports almost everything Windows support, but not everything. So if your buy an odd Windows PC don't be surprised if it can't run OS X or Linux.

[Delgarde]

Now, it's time for you to take a long pause and ponder why your diatribe was met with insults.

He's not incorrect, though. When someone claims that Linux has great hardware support - better than anything else, in fact - it's somewhat absurd for that person to turn around and qualify that as "as long you're careful about choosing support hardware". I could make the same claim of Hurd, and it would be just as true... and just as ridiculous.

"Great hardware support" means you can buy common off-the-shelf hardware and expect it to work - not that you have to spend ages trying to find out what chipset a particular WiFi adapter uses, and whether that chip is supported or not. As a long-time Linux user, I've gotten used to having to do that - but it's certainly not a something to be proud of...

[c117152]

He's not incorrect, though. When someone claims that Linux has great hardware support - better than anything else, in fact - it's somewhat absurd for that person to turn around and qualify that as "as long you're careful about choosing support hardware". I could make the same claim of Hurd, and it would be just as true... and just as ridiculous.

"Great hardware support" means you can buy common off-the-shelf hardware and expect it to work - not that you have to spend ages trying to find out what chipset a particular WiFi adapter uses, and whether that chip is supported or not. As a long-time Linux user, I've gotten used to having to do that - but it's certainly not a something to be proud of...

What you call common-off-the-shelf hardware, is often poorly supported even in Windows. Specifically regarding WiFi, I have a 2yrs old pci wifi adapter card that doesn't work in Win10 and will never see a new driver since the manufacturer moved on to other chips and doesn't want to spend money on compiling old code for old hardware. Same card, works perfectly fine in in linux, and will keep doing so for the next 10 years at least.

You can similarly make the case that windows doesn't have good hardware support since you can't install it on your smartphone. It's an equally off-the-shelf hardware after all...

[V10lator]

Yeah, sorry if we don't settle with poor hardware and want to use bleeding-edge, hidg-end hardware. It's MY FAULT.

If you want to use anything except Windows 10 on bleeding-edge, high end hardware then yes, it's your fault as even Windows < 10 doesn't support that: http://arstechnica.com/information-t...to-windows-10/ ... funny enough, all these CPUs (even the mentioned next generation processors) run on Linux out of the box, no matter what distri you choose.

I have a 2yrs old pci wifi adapter card that doesn't work in Win10 and will never see a new driver since the manufacturer moved on to other chips and doesn't want to spend money on compiling old code for old hardware.

Great, so it's (or at least will soon be) impossible to run that adapter in combination with a modern CPU and Windows while most likely any modern Linux distribution will run that combination out of the box. That must be the great hardware support of Windows some of the guys here are talking about.

[duby229]

He's not incorrect, though. When someone claims that Linux has great hardware support - better than anything else, in fact - it's somewhat absurd for that person to turn around and qualify that as "as long you're careful about choosing support hardware". I could make the same claim of Hurd, and it would be just as true... and just as ridiculous.

"Great hardware support" means you can buy common off-the-shelf hardware and expect it to work - not that you have to spend ages trying to find out what chipset a particular WiFi adapter uses, and whether that chip is supported or not. As a long-time Linux user, I've gotten used to having to do that - but it's certainly not a something to be proud of...

Go to newegg or whatever, copy and paste a link to a thread on your distributions forum and ask. It doesn't have to be a headache, there are plenty of helpful people out there that want to help with things like that.

[F1esDgSdUTYpm0iy]

As a long-time Linux user, I've gotten used to having to do that

As a fairly recent Linux user (2014 when I made my final switch, although I did toy around with it before circa 2003), I've gotten used to the hardware I have installed it to working better, more reliably and faster in Linux. And this is not hardware I picked to fit Linux. No, Linux just fit the hardware by itself.

I'm not sure what the whole hardware argument is about these days, I do truly believe it to be mostly an old wives' tale by now. Based on experiences people had with it 10 - 15 years ago, with their experiences propagating probably until either the Big Rip or Heath Death (the 2 most likely scenarios for the end of the universe, both at the very least billions of years in the future).

[wdb974]

He's not incorrect, though. When someone claims that Linux has great hardware support - better than anything else, in fact - it's somewhat absurd for that person to turn around and qualify that as "as long you're careful about choosing support hardware". I could make the same claim of Hurd, and it would be just as true... and just as ridiculous.

"Great hardware support" means you can buy common off-the-shelf hardware and expect it to work - not that you have to spend ages trying to find out what chipset a particular WiFi adapter uses, and whether that chip is supported or not. As a long-time Linux user, I've gotten used to having to do that - but it's certainly not a something to be proud of...

I have an old Asus a6vc that, for some reason, won't work properly under Windows 7 or XP. I can't get the webcam, SD card reader and ethernet adapter to work under either OS. I've browsed the web for countless hours to find drivers that'll work, and... nada. Mind you, the computer came with Windows XP out of the box, and even Asus's own drivers won't work.

When I got too tired of looking around, I gave Linux a try (Ubuntu 10.04 was the latest Ubuntu release) and everything worked out of the box. That's great hardware support (and even moreso when compared to Windows) if you ask me.

Again, manufacturers are the ones who make the drivers. Said drivers are prorietary the vast majority of the time, so no one is legally allowed to muck around with the code. Besides, claiming it's Linux's fault for hardware that performs poorly or downright refuses to work is like complaining that no one is taking Xhosa classes to watch your movie that only has Xhosa audio and no subtitles at all.