Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34

Thread: Linux 3.0 Kernel May Remove Some Old Cruft

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    134

    Default Lazy & destructive

    With all due respects to Alan Cox, it's not the first time he's pushed for killing off useful drivers to make his life easier (remember libata vs ide debate?). Those are WORKING drivers that aren't hurting anyone, why does he want to artificially remove support? While Alan may be a great hacker, he also has this lazy/destructive attitude (towards things he personally doesn't care about) that will hopefully be kept in check by more rational kernel devs.
    Last edited by stan; 05-24-2011 at 04:48 PM.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bwat47 View Post
    Who Cares? I really don't get why people are so wrapped up in version numbers these days...
    I'm not getting wrapped up in version numbers. I think that 3.0 should be just like any other 2.6 kernel release and that they shouldn't do anything special to make 3.0 seem like a major release.

    I don't even know of anyone who would say that the 2.6 development model was a failure, so why would they want to change that now? If he wants to remove old drivers then Alan can wait until 3.1 or 3.2, there is no reason to hastily rip out these drivers when the merge window closes in less than a week. I think Linus would see it the same way.

    I just went back to read the thread on LKML and H. Peter Anvin said it better than I could:
    https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/5/24/398

    And then Linus agreed.
    https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/5/24/400

    Quote Originally Posted by Linus
    Indeed.

    It's not about features. It hasn't been about features for forever.

    So a renumbering would be purely about dropping the numbers to
    something smaller and more easily recognized. The ABI wouldn't change.
    The API wouldn't change. There wouldn't be any big "because we finally
    did xyz".

    Linus
    Last edited by pvtcupcakes; 05-24-2011 at 05:20 PM.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by roland View Post
    Modern motherboards use an ISA bus for small devices like sensors even though they do not have a physical slot.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industr...embedded_chips

    I already knew that because I've developed for embedded devices and sensors. The i2c bus is on the isa bus along with many other devices such as the old ps2 keyboard and mice controllers.

    In the kernel config AMD64 just doesn't provide the option of selecting the isa bus but it is there. Many may not realize that but it isn't very important because the isa bus doesn't require a large kernel footprint and simple devices are connected to the isa bus.

    I'll be fine with removing EISA, VLB, MCA, but removing ISA is just impractical. The EISA, VLB, and MCA buses are primarily found on 486 computers and were short lived. I suppose it is a question of how many 486 computers are running a modern linux distribution?

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,264

    Default

    jumping from a MAJOR version number (as in 2.6 all the way to 3.0) is deserves some notability. its one thing to say "o ya we're going to add nvidia optimus and move the version up to 2.8" but a few small things like that don't deserve an ENTIRE new version.

    however, cleaning up the kernel with old stuff is a GREAT idea. aside from the fact that almost nobody uses that old stuff anymore, the linux kernel today is modern enough that it probably won't work well on something too old anyway. get rid of the old drivers, remove obsolete features, and maybe even find more efficient ways of doing something.

    in programming, you can have 2 scripts perform the exact same task without any wasted, repetitive, or redundant code. one script could be 50 lines, but the other could exceed 100. i'm sure the linux kernel has many situations like this right now.

    do this "spring cleaning" and i'd say the kernel deserves a step up to version 3.0

  5. #25
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    107

    Default

    Yeah, remove isa bus, and loose support for almost all temperature / rpm / voltage sensor. Incompetence of the kernel developers triumphes again over the normal humans.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    956

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rapsure View Post
    I already knew that because I've developed for embedded devices and sensors. The i2c bus is on the isa bus along with many other devices such as the old ps2 keyboard and mice controllers.

    In the kernel config AMD64 just doesn't provide the option of selecting the isa bus but it is there. Many may not realize that but it isn't very important because the isa bus doesn't require a large kernel footprint and simple devices are connected to the isa bus.

    I'll be fine with removing EISA, VLB, MCA, but removing ISA is just impractical. The EISA, VLB, and MCA buses are primarily found on 486 computers and were short lived. I suppose it is a question of how many 486 computers are running a modern linux distribution?

    I'm sure the ISA driver code will be kept for exactly that reason and I can see letting the EISA, VLB and MCA code go. Why not also dump those drivers for the old proprietary CDROM drives such as the old non-ide Panasonic, Mitsumi and Sony drives as these drives are hardly existent anymore.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    144

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pvtcupcakes View Post
    If Linus wants to call 2.6.40 version 3.0 then that's good enough. 3.0 doesn't have to be special.
    If it's simply rebranding then what's the point.

    "3.0" will draw lots of media attention,etc so it hopefully will be more noteworthy than "it's just 2.6.40 but we named it 3.0". Use it as a chance to drop regressions, drop old drivers, use it as a chance to rearchitect things and generate interest.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeepDayze View Post
    I'm sure the ISA driver code will be kept for exactly that reason and I can see letting the EISA, VLB and MCA code go. Why not also dump those drivers for the old proprietary CDROM drives such as the old non-ide Panasonic, Mitsumi and Sony drives as these drives are hardly existent anymore.
    These drivers have already been deleted in Linux 2.6.23.
    http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kerne...be49bfbd9e730d

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    .ca
    Posts
    402

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by leif81 View Post
    If it's simply rebranding then what's the point.

    "3.0" will draw lots of media attention,etc so it hopefully will be more noteworthy than "it's just 2.6.40 but we named it 3.0". Use it as a chance to drop regressions, drop old drivers, use it as a chance to rearchitect things and generate interest.
    No non-geek is interested in the kernel. People are interested in distributions.

    The point of the rebranding is to get smaller numbers, plain and simple. It's about ergonomics and perception. Humans also prefer measuring time in years/months/days/hours rather than epoch time; very similar thing.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    144

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by not.sure View Post
    No non-geek is interested in the kernel. People are interested in distributions.
    Firstly, how many non-geek linux users do you know? I know very few.

    You can bet your ass every printed paper Linux mage will have a cover story if the kernel is renamed 3.0. And every linux distro that carries Linux 3.0 will list it as a headline "feature". Version numbers garner attention.

    Aso, see Gnome 3.0 for how much a community can be rejuvinated for a big release.

    Simply renumbering for the sake of renumbering is a waste of a MASSIVE opportunity.

    P.S. Just mentioning to some of my non-linux friends that the new kernel may be named 3.0 got them all interested. And then I said nothing is new except the number. And so they went back to hacking away on Windows.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •