Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Waaaahhhhh!! (Score 1) 621

Your summary is missing the 500lb gorilla, which makes it extraordinarily misleading to anyone following the discussion.

Let's correct and add information to one dubious statement here:

And, one of my own questions: Why do we want/need PE binaries when ELF are extensible [the "E" in ELF] and have widely supported tool chains? Answer: Because MS is pushing it.

No, the answer is: Because Microsoft only signs PE binaries.

And then let's go up to:

why do you bother with the MS keysigning of Linux kernel modules to begin with?

Here is the 500lb gorilla: Because most implementations of secure boot only accept keys signed by Microsoft.

So in order to get a random Linux-based distribution to run on a generic secure boot enabled PC, your choices are either to remove secure boot (which isn't always possible), hope that the firmware maker included your distribution's key (highly unlikely), or have it signed by Microsoft, which means going the PE route.

ELF may be superior to PE, but that doesn't make it a solution to the problem that RedHat raised. X.509 keys may be an international standard, but they have nothing whatsoever to do with this.

It was a legitimate issue to raise, and it was handled badly by Torvalds and others. A legitimate response would have been "The inability of our kernel to be installed on what's likely to be the majority of computers in a few years is a small price to pay for using superior technologies", not "RedHat just wants to give Microsoft blow jobs", which is immature, pathetic, and doesn't answer anything.

Comment Re: Waaaahhhhh!! (Score 1) 621

In this case, it's a poor example, because RedHat wasn't showing any signs of proposing this because they wanted to please Microsoft. RedHat was, instead, saying they felt practical concerns meant that accepting Microsoft has de-facto control over the signing process needed to be recognized.

But if they did? What's wrong with "please" or maybe "serve", as in "If RedHat wants to serve Microsoft, then..."?

Comment Re:Win 10 (Score 2) 187

Where I was coming from was this:

Windows 8.1 didn't really fix the major problem people had with Windows 8.0 (the lack of a Start menu and insistence on having a touch-oriented Start Screen by default)

People hated Vista because of the slow speed, poor memory handling, and the permission dialogs, all of which were (mostly) fixed in 7 (albeit I suspect the permission dialogs were fixed by the third party developers who stopped doing the things that caused them to come up.)

So 8.1 wasn't really the 7 to 8.0's Vista, it was more of one of the service packs that made Vista more usable later on its life. 10 though seems like... it's a whole new Vista. And 8.1 was a nice tablet operating system even if it was horrible on the desktop, whereas 10 seems to be fairly poor everywhere.

Here's hoping they fix it soon. Otherwise I'm going to have to see if I can restore 8.1 on my tablet...

Comment Re:Any links to real conversations? (Score 1) 890

No, it's not. It's entirely appropriate - she points out that the questioner is trying to paper over the extent of the abuse she's receiving as a result of conversations on the LKML by requesting only LKML posts be quoted.

She illustrates why that's absurd (though it apparently flew over your head), and then, after that, goes on to quote abuse from the LKML itself as requested.

It sounds to me like she's getting an extraordinary amount of hate messages solely as a result of her (1) being involved in kernel development and (2) having a disagreement with other kernel developers.

I'm struggling to understand why so many on Slashdot think that's acceptable. But then many support a hashtag campaign whose initial goal was to drive a female developer to suicide because they thought a journalist had written good reviews of her products in exchange for sex. So nothing about some here showing a complete lack of human decency surprises me any more.

Comment Re:"Women don't like trash talk, be more sensitive (Score 1) 890

She's arguing for a more professional communications style. If anyone spoke to (or emailed) me at work the way kernel developers are frequently quoted as communicating with one another on the lists, I'd pass the message on to my boss, and expect them hauled up in front of HR if they carried on. What's more, I've seen this happen (once, in my more than 20 years of professional experience.)

Anyone posting on Slashdot that they think this is normal, or that it's somehow how males normally talk to one another, is in for a shock when they graduate from whatever high school they're from and attempt to get a degree and/or a job. Office or academic politics is often vicious, but you accuse a co-worker of sexually gratifying a corporation in email, and you can expect consequences, at minimum a talking to, and quite possibly (job) termination.

I cannot believe so many here think this is normal behavior, or even acceptable. Yeah, we're all obnoxious assholes on Slashdot, but that's because we're not working together here and we're letting off steam.

Comment Re:ZFS is nice... (Score 2) 210

No. RAID isn't better handled at other layers. If you don't know about the filesystem semantics then you need NVRAM or journalling at the block level to avoid the RAID-5 write hole. RAID-Z doesn't have this problem. If you're recovering a failed block-level RAID, then you need to copy all of the data, including unused space. With ZFS RAID (all levels), you only copy the used data. There are numerous other advantages to rearranging the layers, including being a lot more flexible in the provisioning.

It's also a mistake to think of ZFS as a layer. ZFS has three layers: the lowest handles physical disks and presents a linear address space, the middle presents a transactional object store, and the top presents something that looks like a filesystem (or a block device, which is useful for things like VM disk images).

Comment Re:ZFS is nice... (Score 1) 210

2GB/TB is recommended if you're doing deduplication. That said, performance degrades quite smoothly. I've got a machine with 3x4TB drives in RAID-Z with only 8GB of RAM. Disk performance isn't great, but I mostly access it via WiFi and it's absolutely fine for that. Eventually I'll get a new motherboard for that can handle more than 8GB of RAM...

Comment Re:Win 10 (Score 2) 187

Windows 8.1 worked fine in "just" 1Gb (my tablet ran it with that, it was a very smooth environment.)

People were expecting Windows 10 to be the "7" to 8.0s "Vista" (boy, is that a confusing sentence.) I think Windows 10 though is the second coming of Vista. I'm hoping "what comes after Windows 10" (I'm not sure how the marketing will go) to be rather more memory efficient.

Technically Windows 10 runs in 1Gb, it's running on the same tablet right next to me. But it crawls. All the smoothness of 8.1 is gone.

Comment Re:Who? (Score 2) 621

Given the downmods each of us got in the pile, it seems this is a contentious issue.

Personally, I disagree with your assessment, but that said, I am aware that one person's fair assessment followed by a harsher and unequivocal reply if the assessment is rejected, may easily be seen by another as undue abuse.

I make no apologies for the list, because it reminds me exactly of a typical USAF flightline. Doing something dumb or misguided will get you a direct and to-the-point talking-to; first logical and fair, but increasingly harsher if you continue to resist even listening.

The reasons why are different but just as serious: in the kernel, screw-ups in design and/or direction can eventually destroy the kernel's usefulness and flexibility. On the flightline, screwups in procedure or behavior will eventually get you killed.

The harshness against any whining and/or backtalk in either case is not just someone being a turd - it's a reminder that there are reasons for things being as they are, and any proposed changes had better have a damned good reason up-front.

HTH a little.

Comment Re: Waaaahhhhh!! (Score 1) 621

Jobs, yes. Zuckerberg I can't comment upon. Gates? Supposedly very pleasant and encouraging to developers who reported to him (not always for the right reasons, there's a nice story about the author of one of the first multi-app extensions for Mac OS where Gates try to manipulate him into over-promising by flattering him.)

Still, that said, I still really don't understand the mentality that says a good boss or project leader should be an abusive asshole, or that abuse is a reasonable way to impart criticism that doesn't over all cause harm in the long run. Abuse is abuse. Jobs will be thought of as a great innovator long after his death, but he'll never, ever, be thought of as a great leader.

Comment Re:Any links to real conversations? (Score 1) 890

The linked message was not to Sarah Sharp.

And Sharp has made it clear it's not criticism she's afraid of, it's the personalization of it, the fact so much comes across (rightly or wrongly) as "You're a fuck-up" rather than "You made this mistake".

I wouldn't want to work in that environment either. But then I don't really care for those Reality TV shows that comprise of a rude Brit expert insulting the contestants... (spoof)

Comment Re:Oh good, more contention. (Score 2) 162

The reason we use 2.4GHz is because we're cheap. We've known of problems with it for years, with cordless phone makers making 2.4GHz phones, and with even the most well shielded Microwave oven causing interference. But we continue to use it because early 802.11a gear was expensive, and because "advanced" equipment like 802.11a repeaters was priced for corporate purchasing, when they cost $10 or so a unit to make.

Even after this, we still have 900MHz and 5GHz free and clear. Personally, I think the 5GHz Wi-fi system, coupled with cheap repeaters, is a better system than 2.4GHz, and I wish we'd move over to it. There's massively more bandwidth, interference from neighbors is close to impossible both because of walls and because the bandwidth makes it rare two networks will use the same frequency, and there's less interference from every day devices like cordless phones (even 5GHz phones, which are being phased out in favor of DECT anyway) and Microwave ovens.

If LTE-U both pushes us to move to 5GHz, and gives our mobile devices better coverage and more bandwidth, I'm all in favor of it.

Nothing recedes like success. -- Walter Winchell