Linux Turns 10 275
An AC sent in: "The IBM PC may be 20 years old, but they're not the only ones with a birthday coming up. Check out www.linux10.org for an invitation to a birthday party on August 25 for the Linux kernel. The big bash is in Sunnyvale, just down the peninsula from the San Francisco LinuxWorld Expo, but there are also links to local parties around the globe (or if there are none near you, plan your own and add it to the list)."
Networked (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Networked (Score:1)
East-Coast Linux10 Celebration [linux10.org] will be happening on the same day (August 25) and, while we are starting a few hours earlier (due to timezones), we will be concurrently happening during the rest of the time. .
Re:Networked (Score:2)
Just for the Fun of It (Score:3, Informative)
It talked a lot about Linus himself, how Linux started, his views on Open Source, politics and the meaning of life. (His take on the meaning of life was not insightful, but at least interesting.)
Did you know that Linux started out as an overgrown terminal emulation program to read USENET newsgroups from the University's computer, and ran under Minix?
Neat stuff. Linus was taken completely by surprise that Linux has gotten to where it is today. On one hand, had he known of all the work that was ahead of him, and that he'd be spending ten years of his life on it, he would have given up. But on the other hand, seeing all that it has done and the benefits that it has brought, he said he probably would have went forward with it.
If this sounds schizophrenic, at least according to the book, that partially describes a number of Linus' views. Like on intellectual property.
Anyhow, glad to read there will be a Linux anniversary celebration, and for an intersting commute, pick up the audio book. Five CD's full.
Hmmmm (Score:1)
Bad domain name... (Score:3, Funny)
www.linu x10 .org
I know I almost did. Those damn cameras are going to ruin this world...
Regards,
KGraci
Re:Bad domain name... (Score:1)
then how about renaming it to
www.LinuxOSX.org
Btw, I don't know much about Linux Torvalds but I am amazed that he developed an operating system before he even turned ten years old. Happy Birthday!
- jfdouble
Re:Bad domain name... (Score:2, Funny)
Agreed. BTW: Could you please stop picking your nose and wiping it under the desk? Viewers of the KGraci-Hidden-Cam have been complaining.
Aw... I can't attend. (Score:1)
Another thing happening on the same day is the wedding of the norweigan crown prince. O.k. it's not realy an issue for amnericans but still it's a nice useless fact.
I suggest we all have a great 25 of august.
// yendor
Another 10 year old technology... (Score:3, Interesting)
Quality of web page (Score:1)
Re:Another 10 year old technology... (Score:1)
Serious?
VB has had more of an impact.
Don't forget that at its heart linux is just a copy of a 30 year old os design. The only impact it has had on the internet is that more people get their unix binaries for free now.
meanwhile
They still don't get it... (Score:1)
Visual Basic impacts... (Score:2, Funny)
Is it smart to have techies grouped all together (Score:1)
Perhaps the NSA will have the anti-terrorism(anti-hacker) Alliance their to sqaush the rebel rebellion?
East Coast party (Score:2)
Happy Birthday! (Score:1)
Happy birthday to you..
Happy birthday dear Linux!
Happy birthday to you.
Omega9
$chown us base
Me have birthday too! (Score:1)
Police are on the way... (Score:2)
Re:Police are on the way... (Score:2)
Fscking Sonny Bono... (Score:1)
The tune is copyrighted. The copyrighted *lyrics* are:
Now, I'll have to sic AOL on Slashdot. AOL owns the copyright on Happy Birthday and will own it forever thanks to the Sonny Bono Act[?] [everything2.com], which sets a dangerous precedent [everything2.com] that every 20 years, Congress will pass a law extending copyright terms. And even the Supremes [supremecourtus.gov] have a price.
Re:Happy Birthday! (Score:1)
Oh wait, nevermind..........
Watch out!! (Score:1)
Cool! :) (Score:1)
Happy b-day, linux :)
So I guess this means linux is great software now (Score:1)
Who was it that said it takes 10 years to make really good software?
On celebrating backwards compatibility (Score:3, Funny)
The IBM PC never was very well designed to begin with, and neither was UN*X. Still, both technologies keep their life force because they've already become standards.
The IBM PC was designed to make porting easy for already existing x86 CP/M software. Check the documented CP/M backwards compatibility interrupts if you don't believe me. It used commodity parts because time-to-market was the most important issue. CP/M itself wasn't used because of a legal fight between IBM and Digital. (I believe this was mentioned in a documentary film labeled "Triumph of the Nerds".)
The reason that Linus got so much help with creating Linux, was because they wanted it to run already existing UN*X software, quickly.
As any low level coder can attest, the IBM PC as it is today is a kluge on a kludge on a hack. Just the process of making it boot is a tedious job with pitfalls around every corner. It's got an entire 16-bit computer inside that's only used during the first couple of seconds after you turn it on. The CPU is full of instructions that are never ever used by the programs that 99.9% of PC users use.
I'm almost amazed it still works.
Linux on the other hand has been totally redesigned since its hack days. There are still a major limitations with the way it's designed, though. It's a monolithic kernel, an ancient design principle, where everything is running in the same place, intermixed like crazy. The increased modularity of the recent kernels help with some things, letting you add drivers during runtime, but doesn't help much with larger upgrades, or making it easy to develop for. A more modern kernel design such as the Hurd can let a regular user develop and try out larger kernel parts during runtime, whereas with linux a reboot is still required for upgrading most nonessential parts of the kernel. And since it's just one big heap of code, a mistake in one place can make the whole thing crap out. It's a stroke of fortune that Linus has the inhuman ability to maintain such a beast.
And that's just Linux. For UNIX, the main word is Inconsistency. The inconsistencies of the API are quite hair raising, and many of the calls are practically hacks that remained, and never got implemented proper. The security model is laughable, a philosophy that you either are God (root), or you are not. The commandset is just as intuitive as you'd expect, where practically every program has a different way of recieving command line arguments. The X Window System is an add on that is also full of kludges. It eats more and more memory and can never release it. It is optimized for a situation that is hardly ever the case, namely that the applications are running on a remote computer, making every tiny little bit that's going to appear on your screen pass through a bunch of network abstraction layers. That's one of the reasons X on a monster workstation often feels slower than the actually hundreds of times slower machines we were using in the 80's...
Excuse me for hardly even touching the surface on that one, but I started feeling nauseous.
All the while we were focusing our efforts on what was already there, smart new designs came and went, because they weren't backwards compatible.
Great new designs have been researched, which would help the totally different demands of computing today. But still people cling to what they know, and prefer to hang on to what they have no matter how much extra work it'll take in the long run.
Why is this? So we can run software from the 80's? Modern versions of Windows won't. Linux will, but what is the use, seeing that practically everything has been rewritten since anyhow?
The reason not for switching to something new is not to rewrite the software, but that's happening continuously anyhow, so why would that be a problem?
What's holding us back then? To put it in Slashdot terms I think it's FUD. Not the technique, but the feelings themself. Human nature.
We pretty much like it better the older it gets, no matter how many wrinkles and scars it accumulates.
Happy Birthday, PC and Linux.
We love you more each year.
Re:On celebrating backwards compatibility (Score:1)
So we can run software from the 80's? Modern versions of Windows won't. Linux will, but what is the use, seeing that practically everything has been rewritten since anyhow?
I'm a bit confused. Which Linux software from the 1980s can still run on Linux? And btw, most MS-DOS and Windows 3.1 programs run on Windows XP. Have you heard of WOW (Windows on Windows)?
Re:On celebrating backwards compatibility (Score:2)
The point of fact is that Linux was specifically developed to run existing software. .
You'll find most of it at gnu.org.
KFG
Re:On celebrating backwards compatibility (Score:2, Interesting)
Are we talking about the same OS? There is a reason that UNIX has remained essentially unchanged for the last thirty years, and that intelligent folks like Torvalds or the BSD or GNU people chose to clone UNIX instead of some other system. The reason is that UNIX is a Good Idea.
Take the API, for instance. Compared to most other systems in history it's a miracle of elegance and simplicity. In many OSes (especially those in the 60's), you have different system calls to write to a disk, systems calls to write to the printer, the display, other processes, etc. In UNIX, on the other hand, everything is a file (or more properly a file handle): regular files, directories, disks, tapes, pipes, sockets... The entire UNIX API boils down to open()/read()/write()/close(). Sure, implementations have acquired a lot of cruft of the years, but that's a property of any living system.
Take the file system. Other systems give you crap like drive letters, device names, and UNC paths. Not so in UNIX, where all your files and other stuff exist in a single unified namespace. You can use tar to write to a file, a tape, or a CD writer; it's all the same. One interface for everything.
Take the user interface. Instead of providing a lot of commands with lots of options for accomplishing some specific task, UNIX gives you a few commands that each do a particular thing well, along with the infrastructure (e.g., pipes) to combine them. Then the user can build arbitrarily complex stuff from a few simple commands.
In summary, UNIX is succesful (and becoming more so every day) because it is a work of art. Really. May it last another 30 years.
Demons not invited... (Score:2, Funny)
I'm already packing for the party (Score:2, Funny)
Stake
Holy Water
Crossbow
Sig-Sauer with carbon fibre bullets (Ultraviolet has much better weapons!!)
Ancient volumes on Vampires, Demons and other creatures of the night..
Oh, damn thats Sunnydale not SunnyVale.
Anyway, why did a vampire who gets sunburn very easily, decide to live in California ? Maine or Seattle whould be much better for his complexion.Ah, that explains Microsoft!!
Re:Demons not invited... (Score:1)
new kernel (Score:2)
Re:new kernel (Score:1)
Wrong Date? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Wrong Date? (Score:1)
Re:Wrong Date? (Score:2, Informative)
See also this history of linux [hypermart.net].
Re:Wrong Date? (Score:1)
Re:Wrong Date? (Score:1)
Please dont bring a model rocket. (Score:1)
*
DC area? (Score:2)
Re:DC area? (Score:2)
I'm looking around...and so far, nothing in the Balt/DC area(s). One of the LUGs (see linux.com) might have something.
East-Coast Event was Re:DC area? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:East-Coast Event was Re:DC area? (Score:2)
Re:East-Coast Event was Re:DC area? (Score:2)
Re:East-Coast Event was Re:DC area? (Score:1)
Re:East-Coast Event was Re:DC area? (Score:1)
I was wondering why t-shirt sales are going up. Man, I was worried we wouldn't sell enough to cover the money I put down on them. There's still a couple hundred more, but make sure you Philly dudes get your orders in.
PLUG and BCLUG rock!
Thanks, Drew
Re:East-Coast Event (Score:1)
A good way to describe FDR Park's location: the intersection of Broad & Pattison on the corner opposite that of Veterans Stadium.
Re:East-Coast Event (Score:1)
that is what you're talking about, right?
damn.... (Score:1)
Massive Bash -- backyard style? (Score:2)
Re:Massive Bash -- backyard style? (Score:2)
I 'll pass on the party! (Score:1, Funny)
I can imagine thousands of dot-com 3733T 4AK3RZ trying to network to find jobs!
Inviting geeks to a party? Are you INSANE? (Score:3, Funny)
Linux developers should be proud... (Score:4, Insightful)
What's most amazing is that we've done it all on our own sweat, blood and tears. We've created something for ourselves (and others) that is powerful, useful, and has shaped the world of technology (and thus the world in general) in many important ways. All of it was for just one goal: to create something cool.
Congratulations, everyone!
unix has its birthday as well (Score:2, Interesting)
SkåneSjællandLinuxUserGroup has a page that counts down to it (it's in danish, but most people should understand the numbers) at http://www.sslug.dk/~chlor/1000000000
Why we picked August 25 (Score:4, Informative)
We're celebrating the anniversary of the announcement which got the community involved in Linux. The first beta testers and offers for help came in after this announcement. August 25, 1991 was when Linux changed from being just Linus' hobby to involving others. Yes, it does pre-date the first kernel posting by a few weeks.
You can choose different criteria and arrive at a different day. Linux10.org will respect your choice and still link to your local celebration's web site if you pick a different day based on Linux history. The first involvement of the community was what we thought made this date stand out among other candidates. But as a counterexample, SSLUG in Copenhagen chose Sept 17 based on the actual posting of Linux 0.01. As long as you have a reason grounded in Linux history, it's an equally good choice. (Though I think Aug 25 and Sept 17 are the only two you're going to find.)
For those who tried to argue one date over the other, don't bother. You will never settle it because there are different criteria by which these dates can be picked. However, I urge you to respect the choices of the volunteers who go to the time and effort to organize a Linux 10th anniversary event in your area.
(BTW, sorry that I didn't post this earlier. I was at the Moffett Air Show all day.)
I get dibs... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I get dibs... (Score:1)
Re:I get dibs... (Score:2, Funny)
Is that the new euphemism for what we do when pictures of a naked Tux get us far more excited than we should be? Just pick up a linux magazine at the local computer store and ask to use their bathroom for a few minutes. I can see it now...
Eew, that's dirty.
sorry (Score:2)
Re:I get dibs... (Score:2)
Denver metro area (Score:2)
what a predicament ... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:1)
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:2)
Inter-face. Look up the word and then look up "inter."
bash is an interface. KDE is a GUInterface.
THEY face the kernel. YOU face them.
Inter. Get it?
Perhaps you are getting confused by your advanced knowledge that Linux is just the kernel. You are correct.
bash and KDE are not Linux. They are among the many kernel *interfaces* available to address the kernel and for the user to address.
I wish to God that Sun had taken half the money they spent on testing Gnome and KDE. I would have written them a long letter telling them everything they learned with a lot less wasted time on everybodies part. They suck, for everybody, newbie and expert alike. They don't need to.
bash, on the other hand, is an excelent interface. . . for those that already know everything.
The joke is funny, as many jokes are, because of how painfully true it is.
KFG
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:2)
These 'problems' were well known for a long time. What the study did was quantify them and test them to determine if they were the random gripe of someone with sour grapes or something that really did confuse the average user.
One thing here, however, is that most users are now used to Windows, so anything different from Wintendos is likely to confuse people who first face a new system.
I would, however, be the first to complain about the gdm login window, and I've been using Unix since 1983.
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:1)
More importantly related tasks seem to be placed at random places . . . away from each other.
I'm no computing novice, I remember when there was no UNIX. I didn't use Windows until it had been out for years, and then only because it came preinstalled.
I think MS Windows sucks for many reasons, but I can use it fairly easily.
KDE sucks not only to the extent that seeks to emulate Windows but *also* to the extent that it fails to do so.
At least it's getting better, I've stopped using GNOME because it seems to be getting worse.
Damn good thing I boot to level 3.
KFG
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:2)
Those systems COULD use a better interface. You're right, but you're wrong.
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:1)
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:1)
The moral of this story is, try some test data early, so you can realize that your hairbrained scheme of stashing binary data in a string is exactly that.
My behavior was sufficiently bad that kernel.exe didn't feel like playing anymore. So, that's one on me against a few thousand for Bill.
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:1)
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:2, Funny)
er, OK forget ioctl, what's wrong with read/write?
In other news (Score:2)
[note - XP =18, etc. depending on how you count it.]
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:2)
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:1)
A standardized set of video codecs in a single stable player.
I've been emailing quicktime@apple.com [mailto] asking them to release a Sorenson decoder (not a full codec, just a decoder) so that QuickTime video can be viewed under Linux. Especially as they claim that "QuickTime is a truly cross-platform technology".
It seems to me that without a generally available decoder technology what they are providing is QuickTime encryption.
So far they have failed to even acknowledge my messages. *sigh*.
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:2, Interesting)
No, this is not flamebait. It's an honest (and somewhat sadened) remark by a very long time Linux fan (cfr. my signature) who just finally managed to get the sysadmins at his office (very much against the desires of their NT-minded (blinded?) boss) to seriously consider Linux SMP servers with Gigabytes of RAM for some heavy E-CAD work as a replacement for our aging HP-UX boxes. In fact, one such Linux sweety will likely be ordered quite soon for evaluation purposes. And what happens? Precisely now the 2.4 kernels are taking over the various distributions while having major trouble with their VM in exactly the kind of conditions we want to use them for.
Just to short cut one kind of replies: Of course we can use an older distribution or build our own combination of things (heck, I don't even use a distribution at home and compile everything from scratch). But at work, I'm not a sysadmin, and we have to make do with a few UNIX and NT experts and lots of people who how how to fix NT problems, but whom one might suspect of fearing that a Linux box will explode if they push the wrong key. And no, the latter is not a reproach, its an simple observation. It's quite normal given their backgounds, but it's also a major problem for us Linux zealots.
I absolulety hate to say it, but Linux still has a few more years to go before really making it, even in certain non-desktop roles. It needs a several more improvements in the technical department. It definitely needs to loose its tendency to have stable versions that aren't stable at all until several months after initial release. But most of all, it needs a whole class of people who know a considerable amount about using computers (read as: Windows machines), but don't really understand them, to get used to something which, to them at least, is completely new and exotic.
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:1)
I'm not sure why, exactly, your post was moderated up (perhaps because it was lengthy?) -- you've not given any reasoning for saying the VM subsystem doesn't work, you just give an ad hominem (which, judging by the moderation, was effective in itself). Care to explain what, exactly, is wrong with the VM subsystem?
I'll field this one.
I write this as a kernel compiles in the background. 2.2.19. I was testing Web-1 with a number of 2.4 kernels, but it has freaked, oopsed, and panicked its way to 3 crashes in the last month, so I'm packing it away for awhile. 2.4 does okay on my desktop and the squid servers, but lions' dens we call web servers just eat it alive.
The oopsen all came out of the disk/io cache and most are posted to lkml, but it's like talking to a wall. :(
I do think it will work out in the end, though. We had fun with the 2.2.x Intel and 3Com NIC drivers up until around 2.2.12 or so. That's the curse of a high-traffic network -- you get to be the unwilling guinea pig for all of those 'close, but not quite' kernels.
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:1)
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:1)
But if you really want to know why the early 2.4 VM is bad (it's finally improving a bit with 2.4.[89], fortunately), just go reading the Linux kernel mailing list archives. I scan the list in real time. And read a substantial part of it. Look for reports of machines that hang for minutes/hours while trying to sort out what to do with memory pages when the have hundreds of free megabytes of swap and other nasty things like that. Who cares about overcommit if the machine just locks up before even reaching the limit?
And now for another ad hominem attack: have you actually used 2.4.x like I do all day? Or have just just uttered an ad hominem attack against me for getting moderated up while mentioning a problem with Linux?
Re:what a predicament ... (Score:1)
The problem is that when _ALL_ the RAM is consumed and _ALL_ the swap is consumed ON 2GB+ RAM machines, THEN the computer goes into conniptions.
That is a very specific recipe. Linux should not have this problem; it should just degrade performance gracefully; but it does have this problem. There is a fundemental problem here. They kernel guys may be able to tune the VM to avoid the problem. But depending on the tuneing a malicious program could still cause the catelepsy.
My suggested work-arounds for the whinners with more than a GB of RAM:
- DON'T EXAUST ALL YOUR MEMORY AND ALL YOUR SWAP. If you start hitting swap consistantly, stop!
- Make sure users run with ulimits. Make them real big, but less than everything.
In other news... (Score:4, Funny)
Lotsa birthdays coming up! Be sure you don't miss these high-tech celebrations:
Re:In other news... (Score:1)
I was just about to do an "In other news" post, but the page wouldn't load. Then when I finally get here, somebody's already done one. Oh well, I guess i'll have to add onto it.
In a related story, Slashdot turns sour. Somebody forgot to put it back in the refridgerator again.
"Turn the Page" -- Bob Seger
"Turn Turn Turn" -- Backup Singers for the Byrds (immediately following "To Everything" and "There is a Season".
Oh well, that's all the turns I can think of right now.
Re:In other news... (Score:2)
"Turn Turn Turn" -- Pete Seeger
Re:Linux Userbase Counter Projects 60M Users (Score:1)
Re:Linux Userbase Counter Projects 60M Users (Score:1)
What about the people who are using linux boxes but dont realise it? When they visit a web page? When they collect their mail? Think of where linux COULD be used in a multi user environmenmt, and think of the people who dont know what it is that they are using other that "that unixy stuff thing".
Re:Linux Userbase Counter Projects 60M Users (Score:1)
Re:Sorry, but that counter is total crap (Score:1)
Re:all this time (Score:1)
The truth is,
- Linux is a kernel.
- A kernel does not have a GUI.
- Users never interface with the kernel at all.
- There is no such thing as a user-friendly kernel.
- There is no such thing as a non-user-friendly kernel.
Let me re-iterate:
Linux is not an operating system... and what you are referring to as "linux", a distribution of kernel and user programs, has NOT existed for ten years, and is NOT what this article is about.
So even if you're not flamebait, you're offtopic.
Re:all this time (Score:2)
There is no such thing as a user-friendly kernel.
I don't know about that. Of course, the "users" in question are the authors of programs that use the kernel's services. And I'd say that Linux is moderately user-friendly. It could be better, but it's certainly much, much friendlier than any of the OSes ever made by MicroSoft.
Re:all this time (Score:1, Insightful)
How about when the user is attempting to install a kernel module? I'd say thats as close to "interfacing with the kernel" as a user would get.
Given that definition, kernel modules suck as a solution. If there is any one thing that should be done for Linux 3.0, it should be to define a proper set of API's for drivers, and to abstract the kernel structures from the drivers. Users should be able to drop a driver in
How about that?
Re:all this time (Score:1)
If you don't believe me, look at the moderation done to your third example. [slashdot.org]
Note that comments are posted by default at 1 if you're a logged-in user, and 0 if you're an AC. In order to get a +1 bonus beyond that as a logged-in user, you must get a huge amount of karma. Which is hard if you're a troll.
Re:all this time (Score:1)
Of course, Slashdot has been like that for years...
I, for one, refuse to participate in the karma game. It would be wasting my time, and your bandwidth. Personally, I'll stick to posting comments when I actually have something to say, and not just to increase my karma.
Re:all this time (Score:1)
Although by your logic, _this_ post is a waste of time, as well as your question.
Unless you think I'm karma whoring. I'm not. Do you see me posting top-level? Moderators rarely even see my posts.
Re:Time for it to die (Score:1)
Windows 95 sold, so did NT4, so did 98, 98se, Win2k, WinMe.
Your comment couldn't be further from the truth.
Linux just doesn't have ZDNet on the payroll, a single corperate image, and a billion shiny catalogues to go with a fancy dan 'cirtifiquoite of augentacy'
Shit -does- sell (appearently) (Score:3, Funny)
Well, actually... [smellypoop.com]
Re:10 years is too long... (Score:1)
Is that you !?
Re:Duplicate (Score:1)
Re:double up, uh uh (Score:2)