Linux 5.7.1 Releases As A Benign First Point Release

[Laughing1]

You're under the impression that there are enough smart and knowledgable people contributing to open source which means all the bugs will be eventually solved. This can't be further from the truth - bugs in open source linger for up to 25 years because either no one cares, or no one is smart enough to solve them.

Speaking of proprietary software: when there's a feature which is broken for far too many people it almost always gets solved quite fast because ISVs need to sell software and they can't solve something which doesn't work for far too many. Again, not all the bugs are solved but since the number of users of proprietary software is usually a lot higher than the number of open source users, bugs in closed source software have more chances to be fixed.

That is a market share problem not an open source/libre software problem.

[vsteel]

You're under the impression that there are enough smart and knowledgable people contributing to open source which means all the bugs will be eventually solved. This can't be further from the truth - bugs in open source linger for up to 25 years because either no one cares, or no one is smart enough to solve them.

Speaking of proprietary software: when there's a feature which is broken for far too many people it almost always gets solved quite fast because ISVs need to sell software and they can't solve something which doesn't work for far too many. Again, not all the bugs are solved but since the number of users of proprietary software is usually a lot higher than the number of open source users, bugs in closed source software have more chances to be fixed.

There are a lot of knowledgeable and smart people working on open source, getting all of the bugs fixed are just a matter of getting the right conditions to get the bug to rear its head in the first place. That is if people report it and in a way that can be replicated.

Proprietary software has 0 day issues for decades as well, let's not try and pretend differently.

[torsionbar28]

You're under the impression that there are enough smart and knowledgable people contributing to open source which means all the bugs will be eventually solved. This can't be further from the truth - bugs in open source linger for up to 25 years because either no one cares, or no one is smart enough to solve them.

Speaking of proprietary software: when there's a feature which is broken for far too many people it almost always gets solved quite fast because ISVs need to sell software and they can't solve something which doesn't work for far too many. Again, not all the bugs are solved but since the number of users of proprietary software is usually a lot higher than the number of open source users, bugs in closed source software have more chances to be fixed.

If only there were large commercial entities that sell and support open source software, who actively fix bugs in the kernel and elsewhere for their paying customers, and then upstream the patches so everyone benefits. You know, exactly how open source software is supposed to work, and how it has worked for decades now. Hmmmm...

Your FOSS worldview seems stuck in the 1990's. Newsflash: Linux is no longer a university project or a hobbyist tinker toy.

[nuetzel]

Someone of you seeing this 5.7.0 (1)

Intel AX200 (iwlwifi) bug, too?

kernel: iwlwifi 0000:0d:00.0: api flags index 2 larger than supported by driver
kernel: BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: ffffae2c01bfa794

kernel: Workqueue: events request_firmware_work_func
kernel: RIP: 0010:iwl_dbg_tlv_alloc_trigger+0x25/0x60 [iwlwifi]
kernel: Code: eb f2 0f 1f 00 66 66 66 66 90 83 7e 04 33 48 89 f8 44 8b 46 10 48 89 f7 76 40 41 8d 50 ff 83 fa 19 77 23 8b 56 20 85 d2 75 07 <c7> 46 20 ff ff ff ff 4b 8d 14 40 48 c1 e2 04 48 8d b4 10 00 05 00
kernel: RSP: 0018:ffffae2c00417ce8 EFLAGS: 00010246
kernel: RAX: ffff8f0522334018 RBX: ffff8f0522334018 RCX: ffffffffc0fc26c0
kernel: RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffae2c01bfa774 RDI: ffffae2c01bfa774
kernel: RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000004 R09: 0000000000000001
kernel: R10: 0000000000000034 R11: ffffae2c01bfa77c R12: ffff8f0522334230
kernel: R13: 0000000001000009 R14: ffff8f0523fdbc00 R15: ffff8f051f395800
kernel: FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8f0527c80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
kernel: CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
kernel: CR2: ffffae2c01bfa794 CR3: 0000000389eba000 CR4: 00000000000006e0
kernel: Call Trace:
kernel: iwl_dbg_tlv_alloc+0x79/0x120 [iwlwifi]
kernel: iwl_parse_tlv_firmware.isra.0+0x57d/0x1550 [iwlwifi]
kernel: ? fw_add_devm_name.part.0+0x10/0x80
kernel: iwl_req_fw_callback+0x3f8/0x6a0 [iwlwifi]
kernel: ? devres_add+0x1e/0x60
kernel: ? fw_add_devm_name.part.0+0x5c/0x80
kernel: ? assign_fw+0x6c/0x140
kernel: ? _request_firmware+0x131/0x190
kernel: ? switch_mm_irqs_off+0x156/0x3b0
kernel: request_firmware_work_func+0x47/0x90
kernel: process_one_work+0x1e3/0x3b0
kernel: worker_thread+0x46/0x340
kernel: ? process_one_work+0x3b0/0x3b0
kernel: kthread+0x115/0x140
kernel: ? __kthread_bind_mask+0x60/0x60
kernel: ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x40
kernel: Modules linked in: i7core_edac joydev iwlwifi e1000e(+) i2c_i801 lpc_ich cfg80211 rfkill snd_hda_codec_hdmi snd_hda_intel snd_intel_dspcfg snd_hda_codec snd_hda_core snd_hwdep snd_pcm snd_timer snd soundcore ipmi_si(+) ipmi_devintf ipmi_>
kernel: CR2: ffffae2c01bfa794
kernel: ---[ end trace a3fef3c5ff4b3d5e ]---
kernel: RIP: 0010:iwl_dbg_tlv_alloc_trigger+0x25/0x60 [iwlwifi]
kernel: Code: eb f2 0f 1f 00 66 66 66 66 90 83 7e 04 33 48 89 f8 44 8b 46 10 48 89 f7 76 40 41 8d 50 ff 83 fa 19 77 23 8b 56 20 85 d2 75 07 <c7> 46 20 ff ff ff ff 4b 8d 14 40 48 c1 e2 04 48 8d b4 10 00 05 00
kernel: RSP: 0018:ffffae2c00417ce8 EFLAGS: 00010246
kernel: RAX: ffff8f0522334018 RBX: ffff8f0522334018 RCX: ffffffffc0fc26c0
kernel: RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffae2c01bfa774 RDI: ffffae2c01bfa774
kernel: RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000004 R09: 0000000000000001
kernel: R10: 0000000000000034 R11: ffffae2c01bfa77c R12: ffff8f0522334230
kernel: R13: 0000000001000009 R14: ffff8f0523fdbc00 R15: ffff8f051f395800
kernel: FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8f0527c80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
kernel: CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
kernel: CR2: ffffae2c01bfa794 CR3: 0000000389eba000 CR4: 00000000000006e0

[Volta]

You're under the impression that there are enough smart and knowledgable people contributing to open source which means all the bugs will be eventually solved. This can't be further from the truth - bugs in open source linger for up to 25 years because either no one cares, or no one is smart enough to solve them.

I hope you don't mean the ones that were discovered years after being introduced? Just a reality check: security bugs in Open Source are fixed immediately. In Windows it takes months. A 19 year old Windows bug (very serious - remote code execution):

https://www.cnet.com/news/microsoft-...d-windows-bug/

let me damn, another one 20 year old:

https://threatpost.com/20-year-old-b...-users/147336/

Speaking of proprietary software: when there's a feature which is broken for far too many people it almost always gets solved quite fast because ISVs need to sell software and they can't solve something which doesn't work for far too many. Again, not all the bugs are solved but since the number of users of proprietary software is usually a lot higher than the number of open source users, bugs in closed source software have more chances to be fixed.

Really? It's how proprietary 'fixes' its bugs:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/13-wi...918542902.html

Your talk is trash.

Ps. he was so many times proven wrong and there are many of his comments suggesting mental illness and I'm not kidding.

[birdie]

If only there were large commercial entities that sell and support open source software, who actively fix bugs in the kernel and elsewhere for their paying customers, and then upstream the patches so everyone benefits. You know, exactly how open source software is supposed to work, and how it has worked for decades now. Hmmmm...

Your FOSS worldview seems stuck in the 1990's. Newsflash: Linux is no longer a university project or a hobbyist tinker toy.

I purchased a laptop almost five years ago, filed six kernel bugs about its components. Out of six, five remain unresolved to this day. So much for "no longer a university project or a hobbyist tinker toy".

You can rely on one thing in Open Source and that open source fanatics always remain fanatics with very little common sense and a lot of imagination (let's avoid calling them egregious liars).

[rene]

and updated in #t2sde Linux (https://sde.org) and test booted on UltraSPARC 64, too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1HCk9JyV8c

[birdie]

Speaking of long standing bugs, Firefox, Thunderbird and KDE are a prime example of various things which are broken or not-implemented despite having up to a hundred duplicates.

E.g.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=184490 (18 years old)
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=227632 (17 years old)

And numerous others. You can easily find them if you want.

[torsionbar28]

I purchased a laptop almost five years ago, filed six kernel bugs about its components. Out of six, five remain unresolved to this day. So much for "no longer a university project or a hobbyist tinker toy".

As a consumer, why didn't you call the laptop vendor's tech support and open a ticket with them? They made the machine, presumably it came with some kind of warranty and support. Many laptop vendors have official Linux support, Dell, IBM, System76, and others, I assume you bought one of these. As I pointed out in my previous post, these companies actively fix bugs and upstream the code. Why didn't you call them on the phone and open a support case to resolve the problem? They would have fixed it for you.

You can rely on one thing in Open Source and that open source fanatics always remain fanatics with very little common sense and a lot of imagination (let's avoid calling them egregious liars).

Or did you choose to buy a mystery machine that does not have vendor support for Linux? In that case, you took this engineering endeavor upon yourself. And if you chose to buy this mystery machine, without first consulting community discussion forums to validate that others were running it successfully, then you truly chose to become a pioneer. And you then chose to use this unsupported untested pioneer laptop as a primary production machine? This sounds like a comedy of poor decision making. And you believe this is all the kernel dev team's fault? Speaking of little common sense and lots of imagination...

[birdie]

As a consumer, why didn't you call the laptop vendor's tech support and open a ticket with them? They made the machine, presumably it came with some kind of warranty and support. Many laptop vendors have official Linux support, Dell, IBM, System76, and others, I assume you bought one of these. As I pointed out in my previous post, these companies actively fix bugs and upstream the code. Why didn't you call them on the phone and open a support case to resolve the problem? They would have fixed it for you.


Or did you choose to buy a mystery machine that does not have vendor support for Linux? In that case, you took this engineering endeavor upon yourself. And if you chose to buy this mystery machine, without first consulting community discussion forums to validate that others were running it successfully, then you truly chose to become a pioneer. And you then chose to use this unsupported untested pioneer laptop as a primary production machine? This sounds like a comedy of poor decision making. And you believe this is all the kernel dev team's fault? Speaking of little common sense and lots of imagination...

Ah, we are back to "buy special equipment for Linux" LMAO. First-world problems for sure because I cannot fucking afford a laptop certified for Linux (BTW my laptop has only Intel components aside from the LAN card). So much for a universal desktop OS. Beat it (enough with swearing in one message) with your advice. Never wanna see another word for you. Another Linux fanatic for sure who's likely never filed a single bug report.