Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 16th Oct 2008 22:08 UTC, submitted by diegocg
Kexec is a feature that allows to boot kernels from a working kernel. It was originally intended for use by kernel and system developers who had to reboot several times a day. Soon, system administrators for high-availability servers found use for it as well. As systems get more and more advanced, and boot times get longer, end users can now benefit from it.
Thread beginning with comment 334034
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Flawed but with some serious possibilities!
by bornagainenguin on Fri 17th Oct 2008 01:49
in reply to "RE: Flawed but with some serious possibilities!"
Member since:2005-08-07
morph whined...
One cited example of a driver problem from the example is sufficient evidence that "most" problems will be with proprietary drivers? Come on.
I'm not trying to be funny; I'm going by experience and what I know of FLOSS culture.
If there are any proprietary drivers running when people report bugs and the app functions okay with the FLOSS driver then most of the time the reaction seems to be 'too bad' or some variation of 'its not my fault, talk to your manufacturer' and that will put off most users.
Even users who understand the politics of the situation.
"...desperately need Open Source and Free Software to provide the indispensable competition Microsoft desperately needs but has made use of their illegal monopoly to sheild themselves from.
I'm glad that I didn't have to wait longer than the first comment for someone to fire up the Microsoft bashing. I hate having to read through 8 or 10 insightful, clever comments to get to the Microsoft h4te. "
I live to serve.
But seriously we only have to look as far as IE6 to see what happens with Microsoft when there isn't someone around to push and prod them into actually innovating. Once Netscape was no longer a threat Microsoft broke up the IE team and sent them off to do other things.
I don't think *cough*Iloveyou*cough* I need to remind you *cough*melissa*cough* what the end result of that *cough*codered*cough* was, do I?
Besides, why do you have to focus on the negative? I was saying this was a good thing if you remember?
Or are we to infer from your reception you consider Microsoft a one-trick-pony who won't be able to keep up with the rest of world if it has to compete...?
--bornagainpenguin
RE[3]: Flawed but with some serious possibilities!
by Morph on Fri 17th Oct 2008 10:28
in reply to "RE[2]: Flawed but with some serious possibilities!"
Member since:2007-08-20
what I know of FLOSS culture...If there are any proprietary drivers running when people report bugs and the app functions okay with the FLOSS driver then most of the time the reaction seems to be 'too bad' or some variation of 'its not my fault
Sounds like the problem is (partly) with FOSS culture, then!?
look as far as IE6 to see what happens with Microsoft when there isn't someone around to push and prod them into actually innovating
Yeah, that's a good (bad!) example. Fortunately Microsoft's standards have improved a lot since the bad-old-days of Windows 9x and IE4-6. IE8 is quite developer-friendly and has eg tabs-in-separate-processes, and Vista has some great UI and under-the-hood improvements (don't believe every criticism you read!). Competition surely did play a role here. I'd guess that Apple, Google and Mozilla are mostly to thank for that!
RE[2]: Flawed but with some serious possibilities!
by segedunum on Fri 17th Oct 2008 12:42
in reply to "RE: Flawed but with some serious possibilities!"
Member since:2005-07-06
One cited example of a driver problem from the example is sufficient evidence that "most" problems will be with proprietary drivers? Come on.
Well yes, logically they will. The good thing about open source drivers shipped with a kernel is that those drivers are tested with that kernel as one whole and their overall quality and stability is kept up to a reasonable level as a result. If a driver presents a problem then an awful lot of people are going to know about it. With binary add-on drivers you have no guarantee whatsoever what will happen, and that approach kind of negates the point of this - being able to boot up reliably fast.
I'm glad that I didn't have to wait longer than the first comment for someone to fire up the Microsoft bashing. I hate having to read through 8 or 10 insightful, clever comments to get to the Microsoft h4te.
Pity Microsoft. They don't have a kernel and driver infrastructure that allows them to be able to do useful stuff like this, and like it or lump it, when you get to the common denominator, being able to do this reliably relies on the integrity of the kernel and drivers and ultimately having the source available.
It's just a shame that we will have to sit through endless reboots of new drivers and patches.
Edited 2008-10-17 12:53 UTC
Member since:
2007-08-20
One cited example of a driver problem from the example is sufficient evidence that "most" problems will be with proprietary drivers? Come on.
I'm glad that I didn't have to wait longer than the first comment for someone to fire up the Microsoft bashing. I hate having to read through 8 or 10 insightful, clever comments to get to the Microsoft h4te.