×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Linux 2.6.38 Released

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the this-is-your-kernel-on-speed dept.

Upgrades 159

darthcamaro writes "The new Linux 2.6.38 kernel is now out, and it's got a long list of performance improvements that should make Linux a whole lot faster. The kernel includes support for Transparent Huge Pages, Transmit Packet Steering (XPS), automatic process grouping, and a new RCU (Read/Copy/Update)-based path name lookup. '"This patch series was both controversial and experimental when it went in, but we're very hopeful of seeing speedups," James Bottomley, distinguished engineer at Novell said. "Just to set expectations correctly, the dcache/path lookup improvements really only impact workloads with large metadata modifications, so the big iron workloads (like databases) will likely see no change. However, stuff that critically involves metadata, like running a mail server (the postmark benchmark) should improve quite a bit."'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

159 comments

Kernel Newbies link (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35497644)

Informative as usual: http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_38 [kernelnewbies.org]

Re:Kernel Newbies link (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35497758)

"B.A.T.M.A.N. Mesh protocol"
Now things are getting good.

Re:Kernel Newbies link (1)

davester666 (731373) | more than 3 years ago | (#35499490)

Really?
"we're very hopeful of seeing speedups"
This sounds so reassuring to somebody with a rack full of linux machines.

Re:Kernel Newbies link (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35498848)

You are a nigger.

Re:Kernel Newbies link (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35498944)

Trolls are the new niggers. Research has proven that yesterday's niggers are educable, and that they can lead productive lives. However, further research has found no evidence whatsoever that trolls are educable, or that any of them has ever led a productive life.

A now untrusted source of information (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35497656)

From the article:

"New Linux kernel takes big steps forward to make the open source operating system faster than ever."

I didn't know the Linux kernel was an operating system. While I know exactly what the author means, it is sloppy none the less.

Re:A now untrusted source of information (2)

troon (724114) | more than 3 years ago | (#35497708)

It isn't sloppy. The kernel is the heart of the operating system, and the quote you extracted is precisely correct.

Re:A now untrusted source of information (1)

neokushan (932374) | more than 3 years ago | (#35497816)

I guess you could argue that Linux itself isn't an OS but rather Operating Systems are built using the Linux codebase.
I wouldn't, though.

Re:A now untrusted source of information (2, Insightful)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35497894)

he could argue that making the kernel faster makes the OS faster

which is what the quote said

Re:A now untrusted source of information (1)

Daniel Phillips (238627) | more than 3 years ago | (#35499060)

I guess you could argue that Linux itself isn't an OS but rather Operating Systems are built using the Linux codebase.
I wouldn't, though.

And you would be wrong. Crack any textbook on operating system design and you will learn immediately that by "operating system" knowledgeable people mean "the kernel".

Does this make a joke of Apple calling FreeBSD "iOS" and Google calling Linux "Android"? Why yes it does, but shush don't them them, they could be terribly wounded.

Re:A now untrusted source of information (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35497946)

No, it's sloppy. The unclear reference is "the open source operating system". The author either writes "the Linux kernel" to mean "the kernel of the Linux operating system", in which case the reference is clear but wrong, or he means "the kernel called 'Linux'", which is correct but leaves the "the" in "the open source operating system" unclear.

This display of GNU/pedantry was brought to you by the conglomerate of posters known as AC.

Re:A now untrusted source of information (5, Funny)

anon37 (522694) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498982)

Incorrect. The term "operating system" refers to software written by Richard Stallman and GNU. The "Linux kernel" is not "the heart" of anything! It is merely a component in the Emacs software suite.

200-line patch (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 3 years ago | (#35497736)

Isn't this the version that 200-line patch was slated for?

Re:200-line patch (2)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 3 years ago | (#35497806)

Isn't this the version that 200-line patch was slated for?

I'm pretty sure that's what "automatic process grouping" is.

Re:200-line patch (1)

neokushan (932374) | more than 3 years ago | (#35497844)

aka "the wonder patch".

As someone who knows bugger all about Linux, can anyone confirm if that patch will have any kind of impact on Android Devices or is it the kind of thing only a desktop user will see a difference with?

Re:200-line patch (2)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35497960)

i think that's the wonder of it

because i wonder what it will do, too

albeit, i haven't followed kernel fixes for years

i imagine someone's found a way to fake priority by treating a group of processes as one process when allocating cpu, because it solves one problem someone was having while causing someone else a problem

the example was forking 20 compile processes. normally that's a big speedup because when one has to pend on some i/o, another can pick up and do some work on your overall compile. with this new scheduling instead of 20 new processes crowding the few existing processes into much less cpu, now the 20 processes only act like one new process

which makes me wonder why you'd fork 20 processes any more, since they'll have only one process' share of the resource. might as well run them sequentially; it'll take almost exactly as long

unless that example wasn't the benchmark we're looking for...

Re:200-line patch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35498084)

Well, you'd fork 20 processes for a mixed CPU/IO workload (like your compiling example) if you wanted whichever one(s) are not waiting on IO to continue getting the one process's worth of CPU share, instead of getting _nothing_ done until the IO completes.

OTOH, if your workload is entirely CPU-bound, forking it shouldn't gain anything, so you wouldn't. (And if it's completely IO bound, there's never been any reason to fork it 20 ways.)

Re:200-line patch (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498134)

Figured it might be like that.
Personally I look for ways to peg the CPU. 8 cores at 2.8 GHz running web browsers ain't doing it most days.
I wonder if there's a patch for that.

Re:200-line patch (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35498558)

Figured it might be like that.
Personally I look for ways to peg the CPU. 8 cores at 2.8 GHz running web browsers ain't doing it most days.
I wonder if there's a patch for that.

That's what the System Idle process is for. So it looks like you'll have to move to Windows if you want to utiize your system to the maximum.

Re:200-line patch (1)

pantherace (165052) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498674)

Blender, yafaray, and some others, especially look at the fluid simulation (and turn up the resolution!)

There: all the 2.8GHz CPU pegging you want.

Re:200-line patch (2)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 3 years ago | (#35499126)

Figured it might be like that.
Personally I look for ways to peg the CPU. 8 cores at 2.8 GHz running web browsers ain't doing it most days.
I wonder if there's a patch for that.

Yeah, it's called FlashPlayer.exe

Re:200-line patch (3, Informative)

Timothy Brownawell (627747) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498196)

(And if it's completely IO bound, there's never been any reason to fork it 20 ways.)

That depends on why it's IO bound. If you're saturating available bandwidth then yes, but for example if you're trying to crawl a bunch of really slow webservers on the far side of the internet (high round-trip time) then you'd really want to have several outstanding requests at any given time. Even if you're IO bound against local disk parallelism can sometimes help a little, since it gives the IO scheduler more to work with.

Re:200-line patch (2)

smellotron (1039250) | more than 3 years ago | (#35499532)

(And if it's completely IO bound, there's never been any reason to fork it 20 ways.)

I can think of a few reasons:

  1. Code with blocking I/O is easier to write than asynchronous I/O. The system calls are easier. The inter-task scheduling is managed People Who Get Paid To Do That instead of the local application developer, which means it's less prone to weird corner cases like starvation or lost signals.
  2. Some per-process limitation crops up, such as a 32-bit memory space ceiling or a ulimit. Splitting tasks into multiple processes allows the kernel to manage a larger amount of resources (virtual memory, open file descriptors, what-have-you) than can any single process.
  3. Some inherent unreliability exists in the system, such as dynamic linkage to plugins like FlashPlayer.exe or mod_php.so. Splitting tasks into multiple processes allows one of them to die in a fire after shitting all over its own stack.

Re:200-line patch (5, Informative)

Timothy Brownawell (627747) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498114)

the example was forking 20 compile processes. normally that's a big speedup because when one has to pend on some i/o, another can pick up and do some work on your overall compile. with this new scheduling instead of 20 new processes crowding the few existing processes into much less cpu, now the 20 processes only act like one new process which makes me wonder why you'd fork 20 processes any more, since they'll have only one process' share of the resource. might as well run them sequentially; it'll take almost exactly as long

Say you have regular desktop programs that take some small amount of CPU, and you want to be able to compile things a quickly as possible without making your music skip or your window manager get laggy. Before this you would have to guess at the right number of compile processes to run; too few and it takes longer and doesn't use all your CPU, too many and your desktop gets laggy. Now, the scheduler treats all of the compiler processes as a group, and lets your music player and window manager steal CPU cycles from them more easily -- so you can run more processes and keep the CPU busy, without worrying about your music skipping.

Re:200-line patch (5, Informative)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498140)

i think that's the wonder of it

because i wonder what it will do, too

albeit, i haven't followed kernel fixes for years

i imagine someone's found a way to fake priority by treating a group of processes as one process when allocating cpu, because it solves one problem someone was having while causing someone else a problem

the example was forking 20 compile processes. normally that's a big speedup because when one has to pend on some i/o, another can pick up and do some work on your overall compile. with this new scheduling instead of 20 new processes crowding the few existing processes into much less cpu, now the 20 processes only act like one new process

which makes me wonder why you'd fork 20 processes any more, since they'll have only one process' share of the resource

That's not quite right.

Basically, there are lots of conditions that could cause any process to give up its time slice. Your network application may be waiting for packets to process. Your video player may have decoded all the compressed video it needs for the moment, etc. The idea here is that certain programs, even if they're not doing a whole lot of work at any given time, still need frequent service so they can keep doing what they need to do.

If your machine were running 3 processes (in separate groups) and you ran another 20 in a single group, those 20 processes wouldn't wind up limited to 25% of the CPU time. In all likelihood, they'd continue using the lion's share of the machine's resources until the job is done.

What this scheme does do is help out those other three processes: instead of getting 1 time slice each out of every 23 to see if they have work to do, they'll get one out of every four (via group scheduling). If they have a bunch of work to do, this means they'll effectively have higher priority than the individual processes in that big job. But if they're largely idle, the big job will be able to consume the left-over CPU time.

So it's not a perfect system, and it's not any kind of CPU quota system or QoS system, it doesn't really restrict what processes on the system can do. It's a hint for the scheduler, to try and give priority to processes that need it.

Re:200-line patch (2)

PhrstBrn (751463) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498228)

Say you have a machine with 16 cores total. Person A runs a compile that runs on 16 processes. Person B runs a program that runs on 1 processor.

The old model says that Person A gets 16 shares, and Person B gets 1 share of CPU time. The new model says person A and B both get 50% share of the CPU time.

In the old model, Person A will hog all of 15 cores, and end up using about half of the 16th core. Person B will only be able to use 50% of one core. In the new model, Person A will be able to use all of 15 cores, and Person B will end up being able to use all of the 16th core.

You can see in the old model, Person B is penalized for only running one process, and Person A is monopolizing the CPU. In the new model, Person B is able to use all of 1 CPU, while Person A is able to use the reset of the cores without interfering with Person B.

Your compiles may run slower, but it won't interfere with everything else on the system because you wanted to hog all the resources. Each processor group has equal shares to processor time, not each process.

Re:200-line patch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35500678)

"..which makes me wonder why you'd fork 20 processes any more..."

don't feel bad. not everyone can understand basic concepts of computer programming

Re:200-line patch (1)

Junta (36770) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498000)

I would say most dektop users won't even notice this. It may prevent fork-heavy things like Chrome from starving other things, but the best cases to demonstrate was 'make -j ', in a terminal, which isn't particularly indicative of most user load.

Re:200-line patch (1)

kvvbassboy (2010962) | more than 3 years ago | (#35500698)

I would say most dektop users won't even notice this. It may prevent fork-heavy things like Chrome from starving other things, but the best cases to demonstrate was 'make -j ', in a terminal, which isn't particularly indicative of most user load.

Umm.. a poster above spoke about this patch in terms of Person A and Person B, so I am assuming it's a patch which distributes computing resources in a more fair manner among users accessing the system simultaneously. So, no desktop user will ever notice this as only one user accesses the machine ever. If this is what it is, it is extremely similar to a project I did two semesters back. xD

Re:200-line patch (1)

crazycheetah (1416001) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498004)

If Google decides to include this patch with their fork of the kernel, then yes. But the two kernels, while essentially the same, are two different branches of the same tree now, really*. Google may go ahead and put a lot of this into their kernel, but they might not. I wouldn't ever *expect* it to go into Android, personally, but I may just be quite happy if it does.

* I may be off about this, as I haven't kept up too well on the details, but last I ever heard, the Linux kernel as used by the desktop distributions and Android's Linux kernel are moving roughly in their own directions. Perhaps someone else could shed better light on that.

Re:200-line patch (4, Informative)

Wrath0fb0b (302444) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498026)

As someone who knows bugger all about Linux, can anyone confirm if that patch will have any kind of impact on Android Devices or is it the kind of thing only a desktop user will see a difference with?

The Android kernel and the Linux kernel are pretty much irreparably forked, after the Linux people (perhaps rightly, I don't know) refused to accept the Android patches back into the trunk over the wakelock controversy [slashdot.org]. Unfortunately, the rift there never healed and there was never any real resolution [lwn.net].

In order for this to apply to Android, Google would have to port the changes over.

Re:200-line patch (1)

neokushan (932374) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498150)

I didn't know about this, that was quite a fascinating read. However, I did find the last line of the first article particularly amusing - "As for me, I think I'll look into getting a Nokia N900. It looks much more open, with the code mostly all upstream, and a much more active developer community.".
Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Re:200-line patch (4, Insightful)

vga_init (589198) | more than 3 years ago | (#35499020)

In my opinion, Android isn't the first Linux-based project to rely on a custom kernel. I've seen many such systems pop up in the industry, most of them dead and gone now. The reason is that once the fork has been created, it falls out of development and becomes obsolete after a time. The Linux kernel has been customized and forked by projects countless times. What's going to happen is that the fork is simply going to become outdated and once it's obsolete, the current Linux kernel will have to be forked yet again. Re-forking becomes inevitable part of the project's continued development.

Re:200-line patch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35500140)

What happens is that Linux devs come around and merge the changes back in. ucLinux maintained a fork all the way from 2.0 to well into 2.5 before it was folded back in. Android won't be any different.

(and my captcha is "merged")

Re:200-line patch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35501268)

"Re-forking becomes inevitable part of the project's continued development."

Yes. In other words, Google will have to apply the patch to their version, if they won't maintain it in the mainstream Linux kernel. Tough titties.

Re:200-line patch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35499310)

<troll>

In order for this to apply to Android, Google would have to port the changes over

</troll>

Bull. Good job on getting a blatant troll modded up, though. Here's the real truth.

Every time I update my Droid from Eclair to Froyo and now to Gingerbread, the kernel version is updated. from 2.29 to 2.32 to 2.35 and so on. So, Google may be forking Linux but you will still get the latest and greatest stuff from upstream because Google just forks a newer kernel everytime Android is upgraded. And for that matter, you can make the argument that every distro "forks" the kernel as they all apply some patches.

Re:200-line patch (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 3 years ago | (#35499024)

I don't see it having much if any impact on an Android device. In fact, relatively few desktop users will actually see any improvement. I'm not smart enough to get technical - but everything I've read seems to say that unless you are a multitasker who works his desktop pretty hard, the improvements will mean little to you.

One of the little tests that was offered to prove the usefulness of the wonder patch, was to do some routine things on your desktop, loading the CPU up near capacity. Once all your stuff was running, then start compiling something. The responsiveness of your desktop apps was not impacted by the background work, even though your CPU(s) was working hard.

So, unless you use your Android for some pretty intensive multi-tasking, no, you won't see any real difference in real use.

Re:200-line patch (1)

RobbieThe1st (1977364) | more than 3 years ago | (#35499500)

Possibly your Android's not as useful as my N900, but I routinely -do- load it up with a half-dozen programs and another half-dozen web windows. It works fine, but if you try to do any task that does compression/decompression... it lags things down. So, no background apt updates if you want to work.
I'd certainly make use of some of this... but I probably won't be able to unless someone backports it to 2.6.28 due to the damn proprietary graphics drivers.

Re:200-line patch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35500148)

Yes, if you're going to compile a large piece of software on your smartphone, then this patch will certainly help keep the user experience up... Otherwise.. No effect.

Re:200-line patch (4, Informative)

butalearner (1235200) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498096)

Isn't this the version that 200-line patch was slated for?

I'm pretty sure that's what "automatic process grouping" is.

Yup. Some links:

  • This LWN [lwn.net] talks about the switch from TTY-based grouping to session ID-based grouping.
  • Lennart Poettering's alternative solution using cgroups [webupd8.org], which works perfectly fine as long as you don't care the changes are in user space (i.e. you have to manually set this up on each computer).
  • Another alternative is using Con Kolivas' BFS [wikipedia.org], which reportedly shows similar improvements, not to mention actually pays attention to nice levels. Of course you actually have to build your own kernel, or get it from someone else, or use a distro that uses it by default like PCLinuxOS or Zenwalk.

Re:200-line patch (1)

kobaz (107760) | more than 3 years ago | (#35500742)

Another alternative is using Con Kolivas' BFS [wikipedia.org], which reportedly shows similar improvements, not to mention actually pays attention to nice levels.

How do the current built in schedulers handle nice levels?

Re:200-line patch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35497824)

That's the "automatic process grouping" that TFS mentions.

Re:200-line patch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35498920)

Yep. But I remember some linux users saying we shouldn't patch the linux kernel with this. Instead it should be done on the fly on boot and change the values then through a daemon, which is ridiculous now that this is done. But that's what they were advocating. Just because you're smart, it doesn't mean you come up with smart ideas all the time.

WOW ! SERIOUSLY ? Windows is at VERSION SEVEN !! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35497848)

Much, much more advanced than a version two linux could ever be !!

Linsux must be for Luzerz !!

Re:WOW ! SERIOUSLY ? Windows is at VERSION SEVEN ! (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35497970)

see what i mean about the value of anonymity?

YOUR point's taken, but his? Come on... apk (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35498160)

I value anonymity myself, ala:

"You will dress only in attire specially sanctioned by M.I.B. special services. You'll conform to the identity we give you. Eat where we tell you. Live where we tell you. From now on, you'll have no identifying marks of any kind. You will not stand out in any way. Your entire image is crafted to leave no lasting memory with anyone you encounter. You are a rumor, recognizable only as deja vu, and dismissed just as quickly. You don't exist. You were never even born. Anonymity is your name, silence is your native tongue. You are no longer part of the system. You are above the system, over it, beyond it. We're "them." We're "they." We are the Men in Black." - Zed, to Agent J & Agent K from the film "MEN IN BLACK"

But, his post here?

http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2038926&cid=35497848 [slashdot.org]

Man - It's way, Way, WAY "overboard", & designed to "piss off" the Penguins/Pro-*NIX crew around here... which is, of course, fine... but, just too obvious!

(You've got to be more "subtle" I would say to he! How so? Ok, watch below... lol!)

Now, IF one was to really wish to get the Penguins' "feathers ruffled" a wee bit? Well, all one has to do, is cite statistics like these from a respected source for security vulnerabilities, like this one:

---

Windows 7 Known Vulnerabilities: (03/15/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/27467/?task=advisories [secunia.com]

Unpatched 10% (6 of 59 Secunia advisories)

Sure - 3 are remote... but, they only affect you IF you use those portions, or their "work arounds" (which I do both here).

---

vs.

---

Linux KERNEL 2.6x Known Vulnerabilities: (03/15/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/2719/ [secunia.com]

Unpatched 7% (17 of 256 Secunia advisories)

(HOWEVER - THAT? That is ONLY THE KERNEL ALONE)

---

Thus, this count of known vulnerabilities only gets WORSE when the other portions of a complete Linux (again, such as Gnome/KDE/xfce & Windows managers + more)

APK

P.S.=> THAT's how you get "the boys" here going... with stats/facts... pisses them off, to NO end, lol... However!

The only NICE part is, he was instantly "down modded", & so THAT may "hide me" from the inevitable trolls "Adjustment Bureau" that lurks around here to troll anyone that says ANYTHING "negative" (even if true) about *NIX variants... lmao! apk

Re:YOUR point's taken, but his? Come on... apk (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498242)

You have to multiply the vulnerability by the number of bad-actors attempting to exploit it to determine how vulnerable it makes you.

So, more Windows computers browsing the web (by a factor of like a billion, man) means more black-hats will target Windows computers. Makes Linux computers comparatively safer from that sort of annoyance.

Not that I care. I use both and deal with what comes out of either. They both find ways to annoy several times a month, they just have different excuses ("oh i have to support billions of users!", "oh i have to be developed by random unpaid wannabes"). Makes one want to use smartphones for everything, but that has its foibles ("oh i have a tiny little screen and nobody designs webpages that tall and narrow").

I agree on your point ("security-by-obscurity") (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35498370)

It works, yes, I agree with you... & the Penguins DO get to enjoy that much, per your point next below quoted:

"You have to multiply the vulnerability by the number of bad-actors attempting to exploit it to determine how vulnerable it makes you." - by blair1q (305137) on Tuesday March 15, @07:38PM (#35498242)

Agreed, see above... "security-by-obscurity" sort of "works" because it's not presenting as large a single target to attack (large by USER base that is: Spelled sideways to "hacker/cracker" types, meaning more chumps/victims possible from 1 single codebase for attack, etc.).

"Hacker/Cracker" (blackhat/bad type)? They're JUST LIKE PICKPOCKETS, & pickpockets do NOT operate on "crowds of 1" typically... they go after CROWDS (malls, subways, bus & train stations, you-name-it).

I agree... but, with a "positive note" on that account, for Windows, too!

I believe (based on what happened w/ MacOS X for example) that the MORE Linux gets used? The more it WILL be attacked... what evidences this for me??

ANDROID!

(It's showing you ALL just how "vulnerable" Linux, really TRULY is... albeit the JAVA interface isn't helping, that is certain (swiss cheese)).

I.E./"Bottom-line": IF Linux ever sees the "Year of the Linux Desktop"? It's going to undergo the SAME level of attack that MacOS X has, & ANDROID too... & they will NOT be prepared, or rather, AS PREPARED as are Microsoft after decades of attacks on their wares!

APK

P.S.=>

"Not that I care. I use both and deal with what comes out of either" - by blair1q (305137) on Tuesday March 15, @07:38PM (#35498242)

Agreed again, as DID I (I was using KUbuntu 10.10x this round, but it blew itself up out of its own package mgt. tool, which "blew me away"... it literally WRECKED the KDE shell itself on an update... pissed me OFF huge actually! It was to the point startx didn't even work @ bootup to console mode!)

apk

Re:I agree on your point ("security-by-obscurity") (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35499152)

I heard that linux was vulnerable to /etc/hosts files. Have you heard about that?

"ReVeRsE PsYcHoLoGy" @ work (lol) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35499766)

"?that about heard you Have files. /etc/hosts to vulnerable was linux that heard I " - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15, @09:38PM (#35499152)

Yea... "ok", lol!

APK

Re:"ReVeRsE PsYcHoLoGy" @ work (lol) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35500176)

Dude, you are freaking nutcase. But, God you're hilarious with that host file crap.

Troll: is YOUR fav. color "transparent"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35500292)

I mean, please... give me a break with this b.s.:

"Dude, you are freaking nutcase." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 16, @12:17AM (#35500176)

Wait a second: For once, *I* am going to play "sidewalk psychiatrist" here, not you (for all the times you dweebs have to resort to off topic b.s. & calling ME "nuts" etc./et al)

I did already (per my "ReVeRsE PsYcHoLoGy" reply to your gibberish)... you?

You're just "biting off my style"... no creativity, originality, or let's face it: STYLE, on your end!

(Fact is, I gotta say it? You WISH you were me, lol!)

----

"But, God you're hilarious with that host file crap." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 16, @12:17AM (#35500176)

Not really, because after all? YOU BROUGHT HOSTS UP, not I! ... & speaking of which?

I just added another 365 new entries to my HOSTS file... for a grand total of 942,014 known bogus hosts-domains I am for sure, 100%, protected against while you wrote that... are you that protected by ANYTHING you use?

APK

P.S.=> Man... seriously: I have seen /. rated as "the 'top-tech' site" online... & this is the "best you've got" in off-topic adhominem attacks & such? Please... talk about "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2EZ'"... especially vs. such transparent fools! apk

Re:YOUR point's taken, but his? Come on... apk (5, Informative)

WorBlux (1751716) | more than 3 years ago | (#35499228)

Look at it a little closer.

In 2010 (last full year)

Windows 7 - 47 (87% patched)

Linux 2.6 - 47 (94% patched)

But look a little deeper and you find something more interesting

Remote vulnerabilities

Windows - 55%

Linux - 9%

Criticality

Windows - 6% not, 36% less, 17% moderately, 40% highly.

Linux - 47% not c, 49% Less, 4% Moderate

Impact for System Access

Windows - 47%

Linux - 1%

Not all bugs and vulnerabilities are made equal or are equally important. Every program no matter how good, will have bugs, and some bugs will be exploitable. Your comparison is also flawed as 2.6 is much older than windows 7. (By a factor of about 5) Your reasoning is further flawed as a list of of windows vulnerability doesn't include, word, above, acrobat, or IE exploits. which will also add a number of vulnerabilities to a home desktop windows system.

Question: How does it feel to be dissected? LOL! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35500014)

"Look at it a little closer." - by WorBlux (1751716) on Tuesday March 15, @09:51PM (#35499228)

Oh, lets! All the "spin-CON-troll" in the world from the "Pro-*NIX consortium" of troll "Adjustment Bureau" wannabes have tried, might as well pull you apart too! Here we go:

---

" In 2010 (last full year) Windows 7 - 47 (87% patched) Linux 2.6 - 47 (94% patched)" - by WorBlux (1751716) on Tuesday March 15, @09:51PM (#35499228)

LOL, yea, ok: Yea... lol, that "looks good for you", NOT!

An 8 or more year old LINUX KERNEL ONLY (let's NOT also account for ALL THE OTHER PARTS THAT MAKE UP LINUX TOO THAT COMPOUND THAT SEC. VULN LIST MORE, lol), has had to fix MORE BUGS than a 1 yr. old COMPLETE OS?

In keeping with the MIB theme here I established in my replies to a normal poster, not trolls like you?

"LINUX = OLD & BUSTED" vs. the "new hotness", Windows 7!

LMAO!

---

"But look a little deeper and you find something more interesting" - by WorBlux (1751716) on Tuesday March 15, @09:51PM (#35499228)

You sure? Especially AFTER the above?? I mean, I just rode you like a bronco... you just MUST be tired! LOL!

---

Man, this NEXT below? You MUST be a "skimmer troll", because I covered THAT in my posts to VALID POSTERS (no, not trolls like you) already!

"Remote vulnerabilities Windows - 55%
Linux - 9% Criticality Windows - 6% not, 36% less, 17% moderately, 40% highly. Linux - 47% not c, 49% Less, 4% Moderate Impact for System Access Windows - 47%
Linux - 1%"
- by WorBlux (1751716) on Tuesday March 15, @09:51PM (#35499228)

If I don't use the subsystems on Windows involved (which I don't)? How the HELL are they going to affect me adversely?? Answer = THEY WON'T!

Linux, on the other hand?? LOL, take a look @ ANDROID (it's a LINUX after all).

---

"Not all bugs and vulnerabilities are made equal or are equally important." - by WorBlux (1751716) on Tuesday March 15, @09:51PM (#35499228)

First, did I say they were? No. What gave you that idea?? Your delusions of grandeur that made you *THINK* you could take me on?? Bad move... lol, see above!

---

"Every program no matter how good, will have bugs, and some bugs will be exploitable." - by WorBlux (1751716) on Tuesday March 15, @09:51PM (#35499228)

Gosh... "I didn't KNOW that!" (sarcasm, lol). Now, picture "BUBBLES" from "Trailer Park Boys" saying that, lol, ok?

---

"Your comparison is also flawed as 2.6 is much older than windows 7." - by WorBlux (1751716) on Tuesday March 15, @09:51PM (#35499228)

LOL, not really... see above (old & busted Linux vs. "the new hotness" Windows 7)

---

"(By a factor of about 5) Your reasoning is further flawed as a list of of windows vulnerability doesn't include, word, above, acrobat, or IE exploits." - by WorBlux (1751716) on Tuesday March 15, @09:51PM (#35499228)

Well hell, let me toss on holes in the numerous apps Linux has floating on it too, only MORE of them, chock full of holes then, eh?

(That's really poor, piss poor strawman logic! So, please... cut the invalid reasoning already - it's making YOU look bad in front of ALL your "geek admiring public", lol, already!)

---

"which will also add a number of vulnerabilities to a home desktop windows system." - by WorBlux (1751716) on Tuesday March 15, @09:51PM (#35499228)

Again, please... I can say the same of Linux, and have even MORE "bugs pop outta the woodwork for it" ( & MORE than Windows 7 has, that's for sure, lol!)

APK

P.S.=> Ah, man... as is my USUAL style? I just GOTTA say it: This? This was just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2EZ'" (which ticks me off, because "the infamous they" say that /. has the "most proficient geeks"? B.S., lol!)... apk

Re:YOUR point's taken, but his? Come on... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35499710)

Now, THAT's a brilliant example of the art of trolling. I really regret not having a "+1 Troll" available.
Thus, in a mixed-feeling state of mind, I resolved to "troll the moding system" - thus "+1 Funny" for you, sir.

Re:WOW ! SERIOUSLY ? Windows is at VERSION SEVEN ! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35498130)

First: this is only the kernel. Ubuntu is on 10.10 (11.04 isn't far off), so that's a better comparison, and by that Ubuntu is a hell of a ways ahead of Windows, and it hasn't even been around as long!

Second: The NT Kernel in Windows 7 is only 6.1, and that's completely different version numbers than Linux uses. You could say that this is more like version 50 of the Linux kernel (probably beyond that).

Third: I'd rather use a kernel that was so good it never needed to surpass 2.6 than one that had so many problems it had to elevate to version 6 or even 6.1.

Last: Obviously troll, but I'm bored...

"Linux is AHEAD" (I agree, in KNOWN BUGS, lol!) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35500414)

Yea, it's "ahead alright", lol, in KNOWN BUGS, and it's OLDER too (i.e.-> Should be LESS bug prone because of "experience" & "all those eyes" from the "OPEN SORES" world (of which MAYBE 1% is really truly active in it, instead of b.s.'ing on /. here, lol & the other 1/2 are from Oracle &/or IBM))...

Plus? That's ONLY A KERNEL as you said... &, to that? Here we go:

"First: this is only the kernel. Ubuntu is on 10.10 (11.04 isn't far off), so that's a better comparison, and by that Ubuntu is a hell of a ways ahead of Windows, and it hasn't even been around as long!" - by Anonymous Coward FROM THE /. TROLL "Pro-*NIX ADJUSTMENT BUREAU", lol on Tuesday March 15, @07:26PM (#35498130)

Yes, as you stated... that's ONLY A KERNEL only too, lol, toss on bugs from KDE/Gnome/xfce etc. & also Windows managers + all the OTHER parts that make up a FULL linux distro... (because THAT would be what you'd REALLY have to "equate" to Windows 7)?

The # goes up... way, Way, WAY up. You *THINK* about that...

BUT, LOL... "Linux is 'ahead'" alright, lol... ahead in MORE BUGS (kernel only no less, minus the parts for a FULL distro, vs. Windows 7 in its ENTIRETY):

In fact - Let's use statistics like these from a respected source for security vulnerabilities, like this one, to back me:

---

Windows 7 Known Vulnerabilities: (03/15/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/27467/?task=advisories [secunia.com]

Unpatched 10% (6 of 59 Secunia advisories)

Sure - 3 are remote... but, they only affect you IF you use those portions, or their "work arounds", to avoid them (which I do both here - I don't use F'd up subsytems, I don't need them is why).

---

vs.

---

Linux KERNEL 2.6x Known Vulnerabilities: (03/15/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/2719/ [secunia.com]

Unpatched 7% (17 of 256 Secunia advisories)

(HOWEVER, again- THAT? That is ONLY THE KERNEL ALONE, not a FULL distro in its entirety (which IS, what Windows 7 basically IS, in the MS world) - so "toss on" the other parts of a Linux distro, lol, watch that number "pull a SUPERMAN" (ala "up, Up, & AWAY", lol!))

---

Still, let's "do the math" & last time I CHECKED? LOL, 6 was LESS THAN 17!!!

(Or has "trollism" blunted your math skillz? LOL!)

---

"Second: The NT Kernel in Windows 7 is only 6.1, and that's completely different version numbers than Linux uses. You could say that this is more like version 50 of the Linux kernel (probably beyond that)" - by Anonymous Coward FROM THE /. TROLL "Pro-*NIX ADJUSTMENT BUREAU", lol on Tuesday March 15, @07:26PM (#35498130)

They're BOTH the same relative age... &, around the year 1992-1994 (NT 3.5x & Slackware Linux (one I used then) 1.0) for becoming TRULY available to the masses... yes, there are earlier versions, but those are the ones folks got ahold of, en-masse, first ( yes, I was "there" for both & on both).

(And, face it: Linux 2.6x IS way older & therefore OUGHT to have less bugs, due to "all those 'Open SORES' (LOL) eyes poring over it (those that don't 'troll' others here like "some people" do, (you) w/ your "faulty 'spin-CON-troll", lol, 'forums - pseudologic'))

And yet? Linux 2.6, despite its "old & busted" age vs. "the new hotness", in Windows 7?? Yes, it has MORE SECURITY BUGS... funny that, eh?? I thought "Linux was SO secure"... see ANDROID on that note (lol, it's a LINUX after all!).

---

Third: I'd rather use a kernel that was so good it never needed to surpass 2.6 than one that had so many problems it had to elevate to version 6 or even 6.1." - by Anonymous Coward FROM THE /. TROLL "Pro-*NIX ADJUSTMENT BUREAU", lol on Tuesday March 15, @07:26PM (#35498130)

---

"Last: Obviously troll, but I'm bored..." - by Anonymous Coward FROM THE /. TROLL "Pro-*NIX ADJUSTMENT BUREAU", lol on Tuesday March 15, @07:26PM (#35498130)

\
No... you just got "SmOkEd" is all... & this? THIS is the part I just LOVE about blowing away "SpiN-CON-TROLL" trolls... it shows you all reading just how utterly noob they are!

APK

P.S.=> Above ALL else here, I have to say THIS to the "parent poster" troll:

I suggest you read the ENTIRE passage of posts here, IF you wish to get the "Linux Geeks" here on /. riles...!

(lol, I think of them mostly like the guys on "The IT Crowd" or "The Big Bang Theory")

Trust me - this technique? Surely works better, as you can see, because they cannot accept when SOLID #'s & Facts show them that there IS a reason WHY Windows is the most used OS on the planet... it irks them they cannot defeat facts/logic! apk

Re:WOW ! SERIOUSLY ? Windows is at VERSION SEVEN ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35500084)

FUFUFUFUFUFUFUFU

Windows NT started at 3.1

And the kurrent kernel says 6.1

so that's only like version 3

which by the way is how long it ALWAYS takes MicroShaft to get a decent version out

Seems Linux has MORE known bugs, lol! apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35500450)

"which by the way is how long it ALWAYS takes MicroShaft to get a decent version out" - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15, @11:57PM (#35500084)

You SURE about that? I mean, which has MORE KNOWN BUGS in it, Linux latest/greatest, or Windows7?

So.... lol, Let's look, & do some math, shall we? Sure... here 'tis:

---

Windows 7 Known Vulnerabilities: (03/15/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/27467/?task=advisories [secunia.com]

Unpatched 10% (6 of 59 Secunia advisories)

Sure - 3 are remote... but, they only affect you IF you use those portions, or their "work arounds", to avoid them (which I do both here - I don't use F'd up subsytems, I don't need them is why).

---

vs.

---

Linux KERNEL 2.6x Known Vulnerabilities: (03/15/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/2719/ [secunia.com]

Unpatched 7% (17 of 256 Secunia advisories)

(HOWEVER, again- THAT? That is ONLY THE KERNEL ALONE, not a FULL distro in its entirety (which IS, what Windows 7 basically IS, in the MS world) - so "toss on" the other parts of a Linux distro, lol, watch that number "pull a SUPERMAN" (ala "up, Up, & AWAY", lol!))

---

Still, let's "do the math" & last time I CHECKED? LOL, 6 was LESS THAN 17!!!

(Or has "trollism" blunted your "L33t /. troll math skillz"? LOL!)

APK

P.S.=> "Read 'em & WEEP", & "Argue w/ the #'s" & good luck... reality & truth? Must HURT, lol... apk

Re:Seems Linux has MORE known bugs, lol! apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35501218)

LOL! You CRA(CK me UP), dude...lol... akp

PS: lol

Enough of this! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35497896)

Why do they keep baking shit directly into the kernel instead of making it a modular system where I can remove/add what I don't want?

SPEED is why (microkernel vs. monolithic) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35498294)

See subject-line, & this:

"Why do they keep baking shit directly into the kernel instead of making it a modular system where I can remove/add what I don't want?" - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15, @07:04PM (#35497896)

The other AC's reference to Tannenbaum (sp?) is ALL about what's in my subject-line... & monolithic architectures are typically FASTER than microkernels are (less overheads going between "rings" of privelege, &/or subsystems).

(Now, I am not sure if you are just being sarcastic, or you're actually sincere in your reply but... well, there ya are!)

APK

P.S.=> The best bet, today? Do what Windows NT-based OS' do: A "hybrid" of BOTH, from what I understand... &, it works!

DISCLAIMER:

Yes - Still, I like Linux though, even though I "rib" on the folks here who use it - I say that, because I consider it a "socio-cultural phenomenon" that proves folks from the entire world over CAN work together & do something pretty good!

(Hey, I used it myself for the 5th time since 1992 recently, in KUbuntu 10.10x... that was for 8-9 months or so, & yes, it was PRETTY GOOD. That is, until it "blew itself up" from its own package mgt. system in KUbuntu that f'd up my entire KDE shell! It was to the point that I booted into console/tty shell only, & even "startx" didn't work!)

That? That pissed me off!

I will just do as I always have, & that's wait again for improvements awhile before trying Linux again - as I have before, with YEARS between tries to see if things got better!

(Yes - they always do, but NEVER QUITE to the levels of Windows is all (volume mgt. & group/users mgt. tools, anyone? NO comparison!))... apk

Re:SPEED is why (microkernel vs. monolithic) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35498626)

All that formatting you put into your text is funny.

Glad you enjoyed it, "we aim to please" etc./et al (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35498730)

See subject-line above, & thank you!

APK

Re:Enough of this! (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 3 years ago | (#35499448)

Roll your own kernel, and you can remove drivers you dont want. You can also add whatever patches you want.

Like "LT" did, ripping off MINIX? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35500530)

See subject as it's "end of subject" here.

Misleading article (5, Insightful)

Edmund Blackadder (559735) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498234)

It is great news that the Linux kernel performance keeps improving, and nowadays you can get the fastest performing commonly used OS for free. But I have to point out that the way the slashdot summary was written is misleading. The slashdot summary has the following quote:

'"This patch series was both controversial and experimental when it went in, but we're very hopeful of seeing speedups," James Bottomley, distinguished engineer at Novell said. "Just to set expectations correctly, the dcache/path lookup improvements really only impact workloads with large metadata modifications, so the big iron workloads (like databases) will likely see no change. However, stuff that critically involves metadata, like running a mail server (the postmark benchmark) should improve quite a bit."'

If you read the actual article you will notice that this quote refers only to the RCU portion. Other aspects like transparent huge pages are not controversial and they will improve database performance.

Re:Misleading article (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35500152)

The automatic process grouping is still controversial.

A kernel for today's world (4, Interesting)

diegocg (1680514) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498284)

B.A.T.M.A.N. mesh protocol (which helps to provide network connectivity in the presence of natural disasters, military conflicts or Internet censorship)

Looking at what happened recently in Japan, Lybia or Egypt...it seems a feature that I would like to have in my system. Just in case...

Re:A kernel for today's world (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35499760)

Just tell me where you live, I'll drive by to use with your mesh AP for some nasty little things.

Re:A kernel for today's world (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35499914)

What, no R.O.B.I.N.?

Re:A kernel for today's world (1)

Compaqt (1758360) | more than 3 years ago | (#35500316)

Unfortunately, if you saw the picture of the rebel media center in Benghazi at BoingBoing, those guys are using Windows XP. How can we promote free and legal alternatives to free and illegal (cheap XP CDs)?

faster as in... (0)

xmorg (718633) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498318)

You know every new version of windows claimed to be "faster" but that was provided you had double the amount of ram you had with the older version.
What do you mean by "faster"?

A whole lot faster? (2)

kwerle (39371) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498372)

What does that mean? Is it like 20% faster? I dunno - I think 5% would be a lot faster. But .5% or less? what are we talking about, here?

Re:A whole lot faster? (0)

CaseCrash (1120869) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498458)

Every slashdot article about a new linux release says it's way faster. If reality matched the posts, linux would be running faster than light and self-aware

Re:A whole lot faster? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35499516)

I'm looking for the huge pages support. It provides 20% for my app, but I can't use libhugetlbfs because it doesn't work with multiple arenas in malloc. I'm looking forward to testing out the huge page support to see if there are fragmentation issues on my system.

Re:A whole lot faster? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35499534)

phoronix.com

Re:A whole lot faster? (1)

Ant P. (974313) | more than 3 years ago | (#35499964)

THP makes memory-heavy stuff anywhere up to 5% faster based on some quick testing I did with it on folding@home.

Don't forget the GNU (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35498494)

Or has the interview earlier today with Richard Stallman taught us nothing?

Minor Update (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35498640)

2.6.36 to 2.6.38? Tell me when there's an actual update.

(Fair turnaround for the bitching about Apple's "minor" 10.x.y updates.)

A Marketing Coup! (1)

rueger (210566) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498816)

Transparent Huge Pages

It doesn't matter what that is*, it's got "Buy Me!" written all over it!

OSX might have the Dock, and Windows might be up to version 7, but my Ubuntu machine has Transparent Huge Pages!


*save your breath, I actually looked it up. [lwn.net]

Re:A Marketing Coup! (1)

Mr Z (6791) | more than 3 years ago | (#35499986)

I have 16GB RAM in my 64-bit machine at home. I actually look forward to THP, since any process that actually benefits from that much RAM would also benefit from THP if it isn't already using hugetlbfs. As far as I can tell, hugetlbfs almost never gets used, so that means just about any process that I'd run that needs that much RAM would benefit from THP.

The other day I edited a page-sized full color scan in The Gimp at 600 DPI without swapping. That was actually pretty cool. That's an app that'd benefit from THP.

Re:A Marketing Coup! (1)

Compaqt (1758360) | more than 3 years ago | (#35500320)

Would you mind sharing the specs on your rig? I might be needing to buy a new system this year.

Re:A Marketing Coup! (1)

Mr Z (6791) | more than 3 years ago | (#35500474)

It wasn't anything too special. I built a pretty basic Phenom II x4 box. Here's a cut/paste from my Newegg receipt, minus prices.

  • 1 x CASE NZXT| PHAN-001WT RT
  • 1 x PSU ROSEWILL|RBR1000-M 1000W RT
  • 4 x MEM 4G|CORSAIR XMS CMX4GX3M1A1600C7
  • 1 x HD 1.5T|WD 7K 64M WD1501FASS % - OEM
  • 1 x CPU AMD|PH II X4 965 3.4G AM3 RT
  • 1 x MB GIGABYTE|GA-880GA-UD3H R

Now, I didn't buy a fancy video card. That total rig, though, cost me less than $1K and that was a few months ago.

Re:A Marketing Coup! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35500190)

Windows is _not_ at version 7. Windows 6.1 is called Windows 7 to illustrate that it's 2 better than XP. Otherwise it'd only be 0.9 better and nobody wants to buy something that's just 0.9 better.

Re:A Marketing Coup! (1)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 3 years ago | (#35500404)

The Dock is the opposite of a selling point.

Wait, I take that back--it does look awesome on a demo machine, so I guess it helps sales after all.

As always, XKCD seems apropos (1, Funny)

mhotchin (791085) | more than 3 years ago | (#35498990)

Re:As always, XKCD seems apropos (2)

jabjoe (1042100) | more than 3 years ago | (#35501280)

Go on then, I'll bite.
That's not Linux's problem, it's Adobe's and the graphics card manufacturers. Loads of reimplimenting of closed stuff needs to happen for it to be Linux's fault. (That's Linux as a platform, not as just a kernel) With Gallium/DRM/KMS/Wayland/etc and HTML5 hopefully it will be Linux's problem and will all go away nicely. Having said all that, works ok for me now with the closed Flash player and the closed NVidia drivers. It's just unpalatable (and you are left in the slow lane of X developments, oh and booting is ugly and you can't switch virtual tty safely or fast).

libre version (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35499046)

libre version is here: http://www.fsfla.org/svnwiki/selibre/linux-libre/download/releases/2.6.38-libre/

http://www.fsfla.org/svnwiki/selibre/linux-libre/#downloads

.38 in Natty? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35499226)

Now i'm curious if Ubuntu 11.04 aka Natty Narwhal will ship Linux 2.6.38

Linux 38 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35499288)

If they are never going to go past 2.6 shouldn't we just start saying Linux 38 is out. Then you could get everyone else to ditch Windows 7 because Linux 38 is like more than 5 times better.

Can't wait (1)

Bengie (1121981) | more than 3 years ago | (#35500048)

I can't wait until I can switch over from Windows. All I'm waiting for is Direct 3D 11 support and fast stable graphics drivers. When I don't need to dual boot to play my games the way they were meant to be played, then I'm running on over.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...