Linked by Nth_Man on Mon 1st Jul 2013 15:37 UTC
Linux "This release adds support for bcache, which allows to use SSD devices to cache data from other block devices; a Btrfs format improvement that makes the tree dedicated to store extent information 30-35% smaller; support for XFS metadata checksums and self-describing metadata, timer free multitasking for applications running alone in a CPU, SysV IPC and rwlock scalability improvements, the TCP Tail loss probe algorithm that reduces tail latency of short transactions, KVM virtualization support in the MIPS architecture, many new drivers and small improvements."
Thread beginning with comment 566323
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
lucas_maximus
Member since:
2009-08-18

Just a reminder : the XP -> Vista transition broke that API, and drivers had to be rewritten...


Broken after 5 years I might remind you.

TBH I don't really care. I like getting in this guys face because of he takes this idealogical attitude about everything even when it doesn't make sense to.

The guy basically said once I should learn GTK with C# bindings on Linux when I am a ASP.NET developer. He also said this golden nugget of stupidity.

Freedom software doesn't require a stable ABI.


http://www.osnews.com/thread?491266

I know there are pros and cons about it but whichever way you look at it video card drivers have been a problem for a while on the desktop ... in a perfect would we would have open source drivers for everything ... but that the thing we don't.

Reply Parent Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

The guy basically said once I should learn GTK with C# bindings on Linux when I am a ASP.NET developer.


I think you have me confused with someone else.

Reply Parent Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

It was you.

Reply Parent Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Freedom software doesn't require a stable ABI.


Correct. If you write a graphics card driver to a stable API as freedom software, then your driver can become part of the kernel source tree, and so it will be automatically re-compiled, packaged and shipped with every new kernel release. It therefore doesn't require a stable ABI.

http://www.linuxdriverproject.org/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page#Abo...

In fact, as a device maker, you don't even have to write your own Linux driver. The Linux Driver Project developers will happily write one for you:

"We are a group of Linux kernel developers (over 400 strong) that develop and maintain Linux kernel drivers. We work with the manufacturers of the specific device to specify, develop, submit to the main kernel, and maintain the kernel drivers. We are willing and able to sign NDAs with companies if they wish to keep their specifications closed, as long as we are able to create a proper GPLv2 compliant Linux kernel driver as an end result. "

Edited 2013-07-05 09:40 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

The original quote we were talking generally about Software Engineering. So don't try to twist it. You statement there is pretty idiotic to say the least. I find it flabbergasting that anyone that claims to do development would hold such an opinion.

Back to kernel interfaces.

Also some companies like to keep ownership of their code base to ensure quality, rather than relying on a 3rd party on the dubious guarantee that it would be supported.

While there are a lot of drivers supported, I am willing to bet quite a few aren't fully featured drivers. There is no guarantee that their driver will be fully featured or continue to be so once they release ownership of the code base.

None of what you say addresses these concerns. The reasons for having a Stable API/ABI are far more complicated (and some of these are human factors) than you are willing to admit or realise.

Your blinkered logic is simply incompatible with reality.

Edited 2013-07-05 09:53 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2