LinuxQuestions.org
Did you know LQ has a Linux Hardware Compatibility List?
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices



Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 04-06-2014, 07:47 AM   #46
Drakeo
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2008
Location: Urbana IL
Distribution: Slackware, Slacko,
Posts: 2,658
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 224Reputation: 224Reputation: 224

I personally watched what Red Hat's big backer do for the fastest computer in the world after watching them complain about hardware and the software and how to control it. The NCSA finally said hey you either going to build this thing or give the grant money back. years of wasted time.
Cray stepped in and asked the software developers how can we help with building the controller.

In what way can we support you. This was never heard before. AMD and Nvidia stepped in with Cray and the system came to life very fast.

That is called team work. And it booted Linux. http://hardware-beta.slashdot.org/st...er-blue-waters
The fact is IBM treated the developers of the software for the hardware like they where numbers. Cray does support it was amazing how fast it went online.

Having a chance to talk to people that are very close to the project it was never about the money it was a hardware issue and how to control the hardware.

when asked what Cray and NCSA would use for a operating system it was The Linux kernel. There is a big deal how we handle the start up process with linux.
You would think Red Hat's backer would have learned by now.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 08:49 AM   #47
allend
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Melbourne
Distribution: Slackware-current
Posts: 3,520

Rep: Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876
Quote:
The g/box is not at fault, the owner should have done some research and s/he would have realised the engines torque and power curves are not suited to the new g/box.
Yes, it is easy to push analogies to the point that they break, but in this case the designers of the gear box are cognisant of the existing engine and should have been more willing to accept design advice when presented with evidence of a deficiency. That said, the stress test that was imposed has resulted in suitable engine and gearbox modifications.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 10:26 AM   #48
enorbet
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware 14 is Main OpSys on Main PC, 2ndary are OpenSuSe 13 and SolydK
Posts: 736

Rep: Reputation: 345Reputation: 345Reputation: 345Reputation: 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by k3lt01 View Post
I do agree with Tobi though, not to often that happens, if systemd is creating a situation where the kernel is crashing the kernel obviously has a problem as well.
Until we know more about how much functionality would be lost for actual kernel debugging, just to accommodate systemd, this to me sounds like "Hey! If we drive a boat at full speed into this rock in the middle of the channel... it sinks. Must be something wrong with the boat"
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-06-2014, 10:59 AM   #49
saulgoode
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 257

Rep: Reputation: 121Reputation: 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
That is simply factually wrong, you really should update your knowledge about systemd. Those things are not running in PID1.
I would not say "simply". Systemd (the init process, not the project) is handling certain aspects of these processes that init hadn't previously (namely the opening of sockets and connections to buses). Systemd (the project, not the init process) has taken on the porting of this functionality to systemd (init) and, what is rather troubling to some, done so with little regard toward maintaining compatibility with other init processes.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-06-2014, 11:23 AM   #50
EYo
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2009
Location: Cloverdale
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 99

Rep: Reputation: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luridis View Post
One of the things that bothers me is: Why does systemd have to do... Well, everything?
The answer is in Lennart's reply to Greg I think
Quote:
We are putting together an OS here after all, not just a kernel, and a kernel is just one component of the OS among many, and ultimately an implementation detail. We are writing an OS here for the general purpose, not just a toy for a clique of kernel developers.
GNOME OS is the goal, everyone else f*ck off.

I added the bold to highlight why I will never buy a RHT product. Lurking the systemd-devel lists shows a lot of ugliness. Transparency cuts both ways, asshats.
 
4 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-06-2014, 11:56 AM   #51
genss
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2013
Posts: 365

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet View Post
Until we know more about how much functionality would be lost for actual kernel debugging...
none
they (the kernel ppl) are talking about rate limiting
/dev/kmsg is a ring buffer, and the problem was systemd dumped too much data in it in a short time

I, as an electrician, think the fault was more on systemd
as spamming anything anywhere is basically DoS-ing the destination
 
Old 04-06-2014, 12:29 PM   #52
cynwulf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Distribution: OpenBSD, DragonFly BSD
Posts: 1,414

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
The systemd philosophy has always been the same e.g. 'we're obviously right and everyone else needs to fall in line'. I've no idea why there are so many vehement apologists floating around on forums...
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-06-2014, 12:32 PM   #53
hitest
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Prince Rupert, B.C., Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 4,282

Rep: Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynwulf View Post
The systemd philosophy has always been the same e.g. 'we're obviously right and everyone else needs to fall in line'. I've no idea why there are so many vehement apologists floating around on forums...
My money is on Linus.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-06-2014, 01:04 PM   #54
metaschima
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,535

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynwulf View Post
The systemd philosophy has always been the same e.g. 'we're obviously right and everyone else needs to fall in line'. I've no idea why there are so many vehement apologists floating around on forums...
More than that:
1) systemd devs are ALWAYS right and ALWAYS know what is right, unlike mere mortals.
2) bugs are NEVER the responsibility or concern of systemd devs, for systemd devs are transcendental, they are on a different plane of existence, and so cannot have anything to do with nasty, despicable bugs.
3) systemd devs are required to respond in short, arrogant, dismissive phrases, it's part of their ethos and charm.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-06-2014, 02:02 PM   #55
Luridis
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2014
Location: Texas
Distribution: Slackware, Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 75

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
That is simply factually wrong, you really should update your knowledge about systemd. Those things are not running in PID1.
I was going by the diagram that is on wikipedia and is written almost like an advertisement with block diagrams and all. Those were all in a blue box with the label PID1. I'll stop and take the source apart at some point but I really haven't had the time. What I can say is I personally had a lot of issues until I ditched udev or eudev. When I saw all of the "not our problem" and "wontfix" thrown around at the freedesktop site, I didn't even bother to mention my issue... I just looked for an alternative.

That aside, I don't think these guys are trying to "destroy Linux" and I don't believe they'd put all that effort into it if they were. I do think a less dismissive attitude on their part would go a long way towards reducing hostilities, as well as making things more modular so that the hard dependency is less.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 02:36 PM   #56
Luridis
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2014
Location: Texas
Distribution: Slackware, Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 75

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
That is simply factually wrong, you really should update your knowledge about systemd. Those things are not running in PID1.
You know, looking at the source... It's incredibly difficult to sort out what is where.

systemd source folder: 4,273 Files in 215 Folders, 38.6MB.

SystemV init source: 68 Files, 5 Folders, 536KB.

Someone desperately needs to go read this touring lecture: http://larch-www.lcs.mit.edu:8001/~corbato/turing91/

There's a section of ESR's unix book that applies here to.

But, I'm done posting about it until I have to time to sort out what is all actually running in PID1. The source is pretty tangled.
 
4 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-06-2014, 02:50 PM   #57
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: LFS-7.6, Slackware 14.1, FreeBSD 10.1
Posts: 3,849
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 1189Reputation: 1189Reputation: 1189Reputation: 1189Reputation: 1189Reputation: 1189Reputation: 1189Reputation: 1189Reputation: 1189
It seems systemd fanboy Greg yanked down his topic on Google+ citing "You all suck!"

I think I now can see why people like Linus and Theo from OpenBSD are ass holes to people. Because they tire quickly of people like Kay and Lennart who think they're God's gift to their operating systems with shoddy code and cheap hacks.

Plus its a good insight into the mentality and maturity behind this... Or the lack thereof.
 
6 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-06-2014, 02:54 PM   #58
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,653
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luridis View Post
You know, looking at the source... It's incredibly difficult to sort out what is where.

systemd source folder: 4,273 Files in 215 Folders, 38.6MB.

SystemV init source: 68 Files, 5 Folders, 536KB.

Someone desperately needs to go read this touring lecture: http://larch-www.lcs.mit.edu:8001/~corbato/turing91/

There's a section of ESR's unix book that applies here to.

But, I'm done posting about it until I have to time to sort out what is all actually running in PID1. The source is pretty tangled.
Of course the source folder is much larger, it does not only contain an init system, but also network daemon, session manager, system logger, ... . The point is that only a tiny bit of that functionality (AFAIK, only the init part, including cgroup management) is running in PID1, the rest is handled as usual daemons are handled and started with different PIDs.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 03:15 PM   #59
Luridis
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2014
Location: Texas
Distribution: Slackware, Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 75

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
Of course the source folder is much larger, it does not only contain an init system, but also network daemon, session manager, system logger, ... . The point is that only a tiny bit of that functionality (AFAIK, only the init part, including cgroup management) is running in PID1, the rest is handled as usual daemons are handled and started with different PIDs.
So how do I build it with the init system, but without the network daemon or session manager? How do I build it with a logger, but not udev?

I can build GCC with C, C++ and not everything else. Or I can add Fortran, or Golang, or PL/I, or D. In the kernel I can build support for x, y or z in any combination.

This lack of modularity is often the number 1 complaint. I saw lennard chew out one guy just because he wanted to use ulibc instead of glibc, he was building for embedded. "Not our problem, doesn't contain features we use."

That guy was probably excited to give systemd a try on embedded until he walked into that flaming. All because he wanted an interop with an alternate POSIX lib. What a shame...
 
Old 04-06-2014, 03:23 PM   #60
hitest
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Prince Rupert, B.C., Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 4,282

Rep: Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
I think I now can see why people like Linus and Theo from OpenBSD are ass holes to people.
Linus and Theo *really* know their code and they do not suffer fools lightly. They tell the truth and they don't care what people think. They answer to themselves. They don't need to be diplomatic.
 
7 members found this post helpful.
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Linus on Linux: The Linus Torvalds Interview Part 2 LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 04-27-2009 02:00 PM
LXer: Linus on Linux: The Linus Torvalds Interview Part 1 LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 04-23-2009 04:10 PM
Linus Torvalds rakris General 1 11-14-2006 03:07 AM
Linus Torvalds divorce3 General 8 02-10-2005 02:34 AM
Linus Torvalds linuxzouk General 7 05-16-2004 11:17 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:51 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration