Originally posted by Almindor
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Linus Ends Up Accepting The DRM Changes For Linux 4.11
Collapse
X
-
- Likes 1
-
Originally posted by cb88 View Post
Linus is the only one implying that it wasn't build tested... and it just so happens that whatever options linus built with are incompatible with the changes... as the other developers have said Kconfig is inscrutable especially for new developers.
The code in question compiled just fine under certain options. It's only a different set, that Linux happened to have set for himself, that it failed.
Apparently there is some automated build testing that goes through and tests all the possible combinations, but it can take days up to a couple weeks to finish running and this code was all committed within the last couple of days so it didn't get caught by that process.
Of course, Linus's argument stands - they probably shouldn't merge stuff that was just committed so recently, exactly because of this issue. And you would hope that somewhere along the line the reviewers would have noticed these problems and the compiler warnings and had it fixed, which obviously didn't happen.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Anyone who wants to improve their capabilities must be humble.
Granted, we can't be push-overs or yes-men so it's important to have strong reactions at the proper time.
The moral of the story - the right reaction at the right time.
There's a time to be calm, and a time to freak out, a time to be humble and accept that we all have different skills and are each superior in at least one area. Likewise, everyone else is superior than each of us in at least one thing.
If people were incapable of having strong reactions the world would be overun with murders, pedophiles, rapists, criminals, thiefs, liars, and so on...
There's a time for Linus to get his guns smoking and time for tea time too.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Indeed. Linus' reaction was fine, the way he expresses himself is not really fine. Well, it is fine for people who know how Linus works; they read the email realising that Linus overexaggerates everything, and that the real content of the message is "this code doesn't compile under certain conditions, why hasn't this been addressed before, please fix". However, for people who are new to this, it can get very confusing very fast. Quite a few people have been driven away from kernel development because of the lack of civility, and that's just sad.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
My personal experience with kernel developers is that they are excellent people who are very helpful. I had a Microsoft SIdewinder force feedback 2 joystick which would lock the kernel under certain conditions. I emailed a kernel developer and he very promptly got back to me and I sent him the debug information and he resolved the problem. Took 2-3 hours and my joystick has worked fine on Linux with Force Feedback for the past 15 years.
Comment
-
Originally posted by swoorup View PostI think its time, the kernel and the device drivers is separated.
Originally posted by LLStarks View Post
So... a rewrite of Linux as a microkernel?
as a matter of fact most OS with monolithic / hybrid kernels (NT, Solaris, Os X, BSD, Minoca, AtheOS/Syllable, etc etc .. ) are also compartmentalized - in that data structures and methods are not "global" for everyone and his dog to mess with at whim, but accessed by an internal stable (or at least versioned) interface, allowing for newer drivers to be added to an existing system, or a system to be updated for security or efficiency just where it needed, without downloading the entire world
basically, Linux is the exception, rather than the norm..
and the reason for this is entirely political rather than technical - developers feared stable api's would encourage commercial vendors to produce closed source drivers , so it's a leverage
but they dont consider that :
a) a stable api is a development pratice, but sw licenses and practices are orthogonal - the gpl would be equally violated with a closed source driver developed against a "linux4" api, so it isn't more likely a vendor would do that;
b) a (versioned) stable api would not impede progress - yes, it would require some more forethought, but would reduce the amount of internal tinkering and rehashing ..Last edited by silix; 28 February 2017, 09:14 AM.
Comment
Comment