Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Linux 3.8-rc6 Kernel Is Bigger Than Linus Would Like

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,316

    Default Linux 3.8-rc6 Kernel Is Bigger Than Linus Would Like

    Phoronix: Linux 3.8-rc6 Kernel Is Bigger Than Linus Would Like

    While flying over to Brussels for FOSDEM, Linus Torvalds released the sixth Linux 3.8 kernel RC. Unfortunately this weekly development release is larger than Linus would like for this late in the development cycle...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI4OTY

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,203

    Default

    I would find hundreds of patches to be a good thing, assuming they all fix or improve things instead of add new features. I think Linus should accept as many fix patches as possible.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Hellas
    Posts
    1,026

    Default

    Sure but he doesn't want to miss his scuba diving...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,385

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    ... assuming they all fix or improve things ....
    Problem is that you can't make that assumption. Every project has an intrinsic "breakage rate" - I usually go with "severity-weighted number of new problems introduced by the fixes" over "severity-weighted number of fixed problems". The rate depends on code complexity, consistency of developer experience, upstream test/review procedures etc.. and is usually fairly low, but I have seen the number reach 30% in large projects with complex code (ie code which was overdue for refactoring).

    When you get close to release you need to be sensitive to the chance that interaction between two or more fixes will introduce a subtle, sneaky, serious new bug which will derail the release and be difficult to trace back to a specific fix. As a consequence, well run projects either drastically reduce the number of bugs they accept as release date approaches or drastically raise the amount of upstream testing and/or review required for last minute fixes, usually a combination of both.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    351

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    Problem is that you can't make that assumption. Every project has an intrinsic "breakage rate" - I usually go with "severity-weighted number of new problems introduced by the fixes" over "severity-weighted number of fixed problems". The rate depends on code complexity, consistency of developer experience, upstream test/review procedures etc.. and is usually fairly low, but I have seen the number reach 30% in large projects with complex code (ie code which was overdue for refactoring).

    When you get close to release you need to be sensitive to the chance that interaction between two or more fixes will introduce a subtle, sneaky, serious new bug which will derail the release and be difficult to trace back to a specific fix. As a consequence, well run projects either drastically reduce the number of bugs they accept as release date approaches or drastically raise the amount of upstream testing and/or review required for last minute fixes, usually a combination of both.
    Shh. Code analysis and software testing is a decade behind in FOSS land. Of corse they are in denial about it, because linuxrunssupercomputers (tm).

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    351

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asdx View Post
    I don't understand Linus reasoning here.

    There are projects who beg for patches/contributions, and on the other hand Linus is actually unhappy that people contribute to Linux?

    WTF?

    Or is Linus just not happy when people send big patches during the rc releases?
    his infantile BS does more harm than good to the kernel's reputation. he makes it seem that he is the only audit and he is too burdened by the "too many" term papers. what role does he play that can't be shared by anyone else other than him? i'm not gonna even go into the fact that the entire kernel development model is mentally retarded and flawed. in normal Unixes not designed by children, the kernel drivers don't have to be shoehorned into the kernel tree. so they don't have to release a new kernel every day because a guy in China patched his webcam. i still don't understand why say, on freebsd I can get the latest version of vlc, but on Debian i'm stuck with the older one because of library dependencies.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asdx View Post
    I don't understand Linus reasoning here.

    There are projects who beg for patches/contributions, and on the other hand Linus is actually unhappy that people contribute to Linux?

    WTF?

    Or is Linus just not happy when people send big patches during the rc releases?
    The latter. He is more than happy to accept good code when the merge window is open. RCs should be stable, thus hundreds of patches are bad, since they can not only fix, but also break things.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by garegin View Post
    i still don't understand why say, on freebsd I can get the latest version of vlc, but on Debian i'm stuck with the older one because of library dependencies.
    What does this have to do with linux?

    You people ranting all miss the point: This is -rc6. This should be very near to release, maybe one or two rcs away. I don't understand how someone could think lots of code changes so close to a release could be a good thing.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,203

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    The kernel is full of bugs anyway. Nobody tests anything these days.
    The kernel is full of bugs? Like what? Nearly all bugs i encounter are userland based. The only kernel specific problem i encounter is ACPI stuff, whether that be power saving or suspension.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    684

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asdx View Post
    I don't understand Linus reasoning here.

    There are projects who beg for patches/contributions, and on the other hand Linus is actually unhappy that people contribute to Linux?

    WTF?

    Or is Linus just not happy when people send big patches during the rc releases?
    Its the second one, he gets annoyed when he gets patch bombs in the late rc stages. Makes it hard to get a stable tested kernel out when a massive amount of patches gets introduced so late...

    Contributions are good, but lots of them at once late in the cycle can be bad.


    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    The kernel is full of bugs? Like what? Nearly all bugs i encounter are userland based. The only kernel specific problem i encounter is ACPI stuff, whether that be power saving or suspension.
    Yeah and a lot of the ACPI issues tend to be issues with crappy hardware ACPI implementations designed to only work properly with windows.

Posting Permissions

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