Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Jul 2009 19:16 UTC
Sun Solaris, OpenSolaris The Linux desktop has come a long way. It's a fully usable, stable, and secure operating system that can be used quite easily by the masses. Not too long ago, Sun figured they could do the same by starting Project Indiana, which is supposed to deliver a complete distribution of OpenSolaris in a manner similar to GNU/Linux. After using the latest version for a while, I'm wondering: why?
Thread beginning with comment 374652
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Kebabbert
Member since:
2007-07-27

:)

In my view, this is non optimal behavior from Linux:
http://opsmonkey.blogspot.com/2007/01/linux-memory-overcommit.html

Linux over allocates RAM. And when it needs RAM, Linux starts to kill processes randomly. This is horrendous, yes? Whereas Solaris doesnt over allocate RAM and lets the processes run till theyve finished. Imagine you have a process running weeks with a calculation and suddenly it gets killed?




Maybe this has something to do with the declining quality of the Linux code? Linux kernel hacker Andrew Morton explains:
http://lwn.net/Articles/285088/
"Q: Is it your opinion that the quality of the kernel is in decline? Most developers seem to be pretty sanguine about the overall quality problem. Assuming there's a difference of opinion here, where do you think it comes from? How can we resolve it?

A: I used to think it was in decline, and I think that I might think that it still is. I see so many regressions which we never fix."




Or this thread:
http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Active_Merge_Windows
"the [Linux source] tree breaks every day, and it's becoming an extremely non-fun environment to work in. We need to slow down the merging, we need to review things more, we need people to test their [...] changes!"




I think it has something to do with Linux not having stable ABIs?
http://linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/09/02/driver_ease.html
"the incompatibility between different stable point versions of the kernel hampers the Driver on Demand concept. You could compile a driver for 2.6.5 and it would probably not work on 2.6.10 if you simply loaded the precompiled binary module; you would need to recompile the driver for each kernel version."

That is a potential source of unstability. Your driver seems to work fine, with your new kernel. But in fact, on rare occasions your new kernel + old driver combo will just explode but it seldoms happens so you never make the connection. (Do you always recompile all your drivers when you get a new kernel?) The result is that Linux is potentially unstable:
http://lethargy.org/~jesus/archives/77-Choosing-Solaris-10-over-Lin...

And
http://www.enterprisestorageforum.com/sans/features/article.php/374...

Reply Parent Score: 1

vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26


In my view, this is non optimal behavior from Linux:
http://opsmonkey.blogspot.com/2007/01/linux-memory-overcommit.html

...

Linux over allocates RAM.

...

Maybe this has something to do with the declining quality of the Linux code? Linux kernel hacker Andrew Morton explains:

...

Or this thread:
http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Active_Merge_Windows
"the [Linux source] tree breaks every day, and it's becoming an extremely non-fun environment to work in. We need to slow down the merging, we need to review things more, we need people to test their [...] changes!"

...

I think it has something to do with Linux not having stable ABIs?


...

And
http://www.enterprisestorageforum.com/sans/features/article.php/374...


Quite extensive troll collection you have there.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

"Quite extensive troll collection you have there."

Thanx! But it isnt hard to find such links. You know, some of those "troll" links are from Linux kernel mail list, where Linus Torvalds discuss in the thread. Do you call Linus a troll? Do you call Linux kernel mail list a troll site? Maybe you should reread those links again, before you call them troll?

If Linus himself wrote that "Linux has no stable ABI" on his blog then that blog would also be troll? Hmmm?

Reply Parent Score: 2

abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

Kebabbert you're absolutely clueless. In fact it's downright hilarious to read your posts. Every post you make is littered with ancient articles that are no longer relevant to the current state of Linux and quotes taken out of context.

For instance the OOM issue has been fixed for quite a while now. It is no longer relevant. The quotes you use to try to justify Linux code quality being poor is talking about the dev tree not the released kernel. As for drivers it isn't relevant for Linux. The drivers are in-kernel and are fixed by the kernel hackers themselves. The author of the filesystem article you link to at the end is just as clueless as you. He claims that Linux filesystems cannot scale and have poor throughput. He even includes XFS in his criticism! XFS is extremely scalable and high throughput. Claiming otherwise is an obvious sign that you know little about it.

Edited 2009-07-24 14:39 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2