Improving Linux

273 · 03-22-2012, 07:04 PM

I had forgotten about all those "Excel spreadsheets" and the like which won't easily convert. For business I think many have invested millions in Windows only systems from the likes of Exchange and document management systems to pathetic junk CRM and server config systems which rely on ActiveX* so they don't have any choice but to stay on the treadmill. I know a place I worked gave some (OK a little) serious thought to Linux for leverage against MS if nothing else but lazy good-for-nothing companies* making Windows only software put that to bed pretty damn quick.

*I have nothing against developers who work on Windows, and admit Windows has its plus points, but these IE6-only ActiveX junk controls and Microsoft-only database API "because the front end can be written in VB" applications are written by marketing departments and don't do anyone any favours since they can't even survive a Windows upgrade unscathed.

Knightron · 03-22-2012, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Alex

I got something for ya. Imrove our kernel. It's getting fat and slow. Stability is also decreasing.

I've no issues with the stability, and as for fat, i don't know what that means. Obviously as it supports more and more hardware, the code is going to get bigger.
In addition to this, one thing i'd like to see improved is the power regression that began at 2.6.38 and is getting worse. I am not connected to the power grid, so my main computers are all laptops, and the power drainage can be very annoying. If i got decent battery length on my apple laptop, i'd remove OsX completely off of it.

SaurabhJain · 03-22-2012, 10:48 PM

Thanks man!!!

Mr. Alex · 03-23-2012, 03:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thor_2.0

Hmm, personally, I've always been in favor of an in-place on the spot compile of the kernel, with only those trimmings that are called for. But, that may increase the install time by hours...

I wasn't talking about this.

http://www.zeit.de/digital/internet/...omplettansicht
If you translate it with say Google,

Quote:

TIME ONLINE: Mr. Torvalds, you said recently during a panel discussion that you were worried about the complexity of Linux. What do you mean?

Linus Torvalds: There are some parts in the source code of Linux, who know very few people really well. Last week discussed the three people who know best of all with a certain subsystem of Linux, a mistake. It took days to agree how this error could occur at all. It is unlikely that he ever makes real problems, because you do already have exotic things, so that it occurs at all. And the funny thing was that it existed for five years. But it is an example of a subsystem, for which there are only a handful of people.

TIME ONLINE: Would you say that Linux has become too complex?

Torvalds: It's not a "now". The complexity has always been my concern. The first Linux version had 10,000 lines of code. Today we have around 15 million lines. Long, there are even sub-systems, which have become very complicated. I await with trepidation the day when we have a bug that no one can understand more. We need to make it easier.

Mr. Alex · 03-23-2012, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knightron

I've no issues with the stability, and as for fat, i don't know what that means. Obviously as it supports more and more hardware, the code is going to get bigger.

What about CFS? It's everybody's complain these days.

jlinkels · 03-23-2012, 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaurabhJain

Can you guys enlist the areas where we need to take efforts to make Linux even better?
By emphasizing on specific points we channelize our focus.

Excuse me, but if you don't put in more than 26 words to explain what you intention is, are you really serious about willing to put some effort in improving Linux? This question is so demonstrating that you haven't looked in depth into anything Linux related that I heavily doubt the sincerity of this question.

It makes about the same sense as asked "how can we improve the Gross National Product in Africa?"

jlinkels

ButterflyMelissa · 03-24-2012, 05:38 AM

@Mr Alex

Of course the Kernel got bigger, because it's a far cry from what it was way back when. But then, it has to cater for some exotic stuff...would'nt an in-place compile do away with the not-locally-needed stuff by simply not compiling it in in the first place?

Of course, this is a gray-ish area for me, so any feedback is welcome...I'm here to learn ya know

TroN-0074 · 03-24-2012, 08:49 AM

So far every installation I have done works fine. There are pieces of hardware that has no support because they are proprietary e.g. Broadcom Ethernet cards and such. So one should expect problems running Linux in that hardware but again is not because the software is bad. I blame all in proprietary licensing.
Which is also the reason of many non compatible apps

Good luck to you!

AnanthaP · 03-24-2012, 08:42 PM

In a way, I agree with jlinkels.

This seems more like a general question, responses to which will be used in a seminar or something like that to look good.

OK