Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 14th Mar 2011 18:59 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y And over the weekend, the saga regarding Canonical, GNOME, and KDE has continued. Lots of comments all over the web, some heated, some well-argued, some wholly indifferent. Most interestingly, Jeff Waugh and Dave Neary have elaborated on GNOME's position after the initial blog posts by Shuttleworth and Seigo, providing a more coherent look at GNOME's side of the story.
Thread beginning with comment 466143
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: F**k this shit!
by allanregistos on Tue 15th Mar 2011 04:50 UTC in reply to "RE: F**k this shit!"
allanregistos
Member since:
2011-02-10

"We the users will suffer from desktop environment quirks while the egos battle it out, watching Microsoft, Google and Apple laugh all the way to bank.


And this is different from how things are now in what way? They've already got enough reasons to laugh at the major F/OSS operating systems without even looking at the GUI side of things. Let's try Linux: kernel modules, no stable API or ABI, subsystems being redone and overlayed atop one another... should I go on?
"

That's the Kernel no stable API nonsense?
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/misc/2.6/stabl...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: F**k this shit!
by oiaohm on Tue 15th Mar 2011 05:09 in reply to "RE[2]: F**k this shit!"
oiaohm Member since:
2009-05-30

"[q]We the users will suffer from desktop environment quirks while the egos battle it out, watching Microsoft, Google and Apple laugh all the way to bank.


And this is different from how things are now in what way? They've already got enough reasons to laugh at the major F/OSS operating systems without even looking at the GUI side of things. Let's try Linux: kernel modules, no stable API or ABI, subsystems being redone and overlayed atop one another... should I go on?
"

That's the Kernel no stable API nonsense?
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/misc/2.6/stabl... [/q]

This is a key block of text.
This is being written to try to explain why Linux does not have a binary kernel interface, nor does it have a stable kernel interface. Please realize that this article describes the _in kernel_ interfaces, not the kernel to userspace interfaces. The kernel to userspace interface is the one that application programs use, the syscall interface. That interface is _very_ stable over time, and will not break. I have old programs that were built on a pre 0.9something kernel that still works just fine on the latest 2.6 kernel release. This interface is the one that users and application programmers can count on being stable.

Notice this is very clear to point out kernel to userspace has been stable from 0.9 Linux something. So there is a stable ABI/API. Of course everyone raising the arguement forgets the existance of these.
http://lwn.net/Articles/296388/ CUSE
http://fuse.sourceforge.net/ fuse
and of course Buse.

There are all ways to create drivers using the stable kernel to user-space interface. Now the question becomes why do you need a Kernel ABI in the first place other than the Userspace one?

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: F**k this shit!
by allanregistos on Tue 15th Mar 2011 05:28 in reply to "RE[3]: F**k this shit!"
allanregistos Member since:
2011-02-10


There are all ways to create drivers using the stable kernel to user-space interface. Now the question becomes why do you need a Kernel ABI in the first place other than the Userspace one?


Education. But I do not think that Hardware manufacturers are ignorant of this information. I am not a developer of this level not to mention being a driver developer, but why is it that most Printer/Scanner/peripherals etc have no Linux driver by default, if they can write it easily using the userpace without touching GPL?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: F**k this shit!
by jabjoe on Tue 15th Mar 2011 11:21 in reply to "RE[3]: F**k this shit!"
jabjoe Member since:
2009-05-06

BUSE? Block device in User SpacE? Cool, didn't know that one. :-)

Reply Parent Score: 3