The Interactive Linux Kernel Map 93
Constantine writes "The Linux kernel is one of most complex open source projects. Even though there are a lot of books on the Linux kernel, it is still a difficult subject to comprehend. The interactive Linux kernel map gives you a top-down view of the kernel. You can see the most important layers, functionalities, modules, functions, and calls. Each function on the map is a link to its source code. The map is interactive. You can zoom in and drag around to see details."
Re:[OT] Editing please? (Score:4, Insightful)
Can you point to some of these NDA's you speak of? Because, I have to wonder how you can have an NDA on something that anyone can go to your website and download the source code for.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Fools! (Score:5, Funny)
Now the terrorists will know where to strike us!
Re: (Score:2)
Am I looking at a Kernel or the Borg Hirearchy? (Score:5, Funny)
After looking at all that, am I the only one who is sorta taken by how complicated it is, and under the impression I am looking at the various complications of the Borg collective Consciousness?
(Before anyone makes the Bill Gates of Borg jokes, I have friends who say that really Microsoft is much more like the Jem'Hadar than the Borg. They don't really assimilate, they just show up with guns and take what they want.
Re:Am I looking at a Kernel or the Borg Hirearchy? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Am I looking at a Kernel or a Carb? (Score:5, Funny)
After looking at all that, am I the only one who is sorta taken by how complicated it is, and under the impression I am looking at the various complications of a four barrel carburetor?
(Before anyone makes the "Big Three" jokes, I have friends who say that really GM/DC/Ford are much more like the Hells Angels than a pack of Greasers. They don't really sit around at Arnold's diner, they just show up with guns and take what they want.
Fixed... I think. We still use car analogies here at Slashdot, right??
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Nah!
They're Daleks
Exterminate!
What a farce (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
All I get from it is more of a basic feeling on the structure. How things fir together. Although it's interesting to see it's a fully populated grid. Usually things don't evolve over time to reach such symmetry and consistency.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What, you are saying, that Linux was intelligently designed?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"Linux is evolution, not intelligent design."
-- Linus Torvalds
(This quote seems to be genuine [kerneltrap.org], I haven't been able to track down a reference though.)
Re:What a farce (Score:5, Insightful)
This will help those who already have a basic understanding of the linux kernel and are trying to find something quickly.
Oh and it looks cool too
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
One great way to start is to install git and, once a week or so, use it to download, build, and install the latest development kernel on your hardware. Some day you'll find that something that worked in week n doesn't work any more in week n+1. Report the problem and work with the developers to figure out what broke.
And, yeah, there
Re:What a farce (Score:5, Insightful)
However, I RTFA, such as it is, but come away only with the belief that this is a further effort to make the OS look much more obscure and cryptic than any OS actually is.
I don't do much OS level programming at all, but I would say this diagram is very useful. If I just, for example, want to get a sketchy idea of how networking is arranged in the kernel and where to look for dependencies and so forth, then it's a good start.
It's not the best diagram I've ever seen but it's something that does make for a good page to have open during the planning stages of a project that integrates with the OS at multiple levels.
If anyone really learns much about the Linux OS from this thing I would be amazed.
If you click on an area it quickly takes you to relevant stuff to read. I think, spending a few hours with this, one could learn quite a lot about the system and get an idea from which end to tackle a problem. But of course it's no substitute for a book.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing says "geek chic" like that baby hanging in your office or dorm room! Unfortunately, we don't want the noobs cheapening it like all the poseurs who have Dali and Van Gogh posters and don't know a fucking thing about either artist.
Re: (Score:1)
If anyone really learns much about the Linux OS from this thing I would be amazed.
YMMV, I guess.
I bookmarked it. I think its a handy reference and I traced a few module problems that I've worked back through the map, and some things I've heard/read actually made some sense.
I like the nav, but I'll agree it's not the prettiest map I've seen. I also like the links.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
If it's any consolation, the energy-minimized version of that map looks like it would put the System column next to the Human Interface column...
because I want pain (Score:5, Interesting)
Someone has to ask it, and I have to admit I'm more curious about it than this. I want to see something similar to this for Windows or OS X, to compare with. Not down to the code level. (I did go trolling around in the code reading some comments, interesting stuff) but at least to see the difference in how things are laid out by comparison.
Surely there are a few that have poked around in those two systems enough to give us a rough fleshing out of the internal structure?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Darwin (its kernel) is open-source (at least some versions)
1) xnu's the kernel -- Darwin refers to the whole open source OS.
2) All desktop releases of Darwin (i.e. each 10.x and 10.x.x release of OS X) are open source.
</pedant>
Re: (Score:2)
Windows would be nearly impossible to "poke around in" and come up with a map like this.
but can't we just ask any good windows virus/rootkit developer?
that and there's got to be a few people "in the wild" that were former coders on OS X or Windows that have this level of working knowledge they could share with the masses.
Re: (Score:2)
OSX would be doable, since Darwin (its kernel) is open-source (at least some versions). Windows would be nearly impossible to "poke around in" and come up with a map like this. You need source-code level access for this kind of detail.
There are quite a few academic institutions that have source code access to the Windows code base - just get one of them to do it.
Re: (Score:1)
OS X's core, Darwin, is licensed under the 3-clause BSD, and Apple releases both binaries and sources to the general public.
If this Linux Kernel view was generated by any means, I imagine the same could be done for Darwin.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You can see a Windows version of the diagram here:
http://www.scotboyd.net/90percent/uploaded_images/IMG_0299-797021.JPG [scotboyd.net]
Re: (Score:2)
Is there an animated goatse somewhere that we can redirect this guy to?
Re:While the kernel is rock solid (Score:5, Informative)
The overall user experience sucks at best. Go ahead and flame me.
Allright I will. I'm surprised you people still exist and even more surprised you still dare posting such nonsense on /. .
The user experience of the desktop-geared distributions matches OS X and even transcends it a lot of times.
And saying it's hard to install makes no sense. OS X is preinstalled and can only be installed on a very, very limited number of computers. You can't just compare them. OS X is not 'better' at installing, it's just out of category. And Linux still does a lot better than Windows in terms of hardware compatibility.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
While on your side in your flame, I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one. Ignoring Vista for one minute with its compulsory driver signing, etc., XP has a remarkably good support for hardware because...all mass-market vendors will necessarily write drivers for Windows, but not for Linux. I've been using Linux for 10+ years, since the days when Slackware was the most "user-friendly", and until Ubuntu 8.04, I was st
Re:While the kernel is rock solid (Score:4, Insightful)
XP has a remarkably good support for x86 hardware
Fixed that for you.
Linux run on a LOT more devices than Windows can. Microsoft's a lot like Apple that way. The limited subset of computers designed for their OS are well-supported, but forget about running the OS on any exotic hardware.
Look how long it took them to get it running on the OLPC.
Re: (Score:2)
And saying it's hard to install makes no sense. OS X is preinstalled and can only be installed on a very, very limited number of computers. You can't just compare them. OS X is not 'better' at installing, it's just out of category.
Well, if it makes you feel any better then you could say Linux doesn't compete in the category 100% of the people wants - computers with operating systems. Of course that'd just start a small flamewar over how Linux took only two clicks to install and how their grandmother could do it. And now Linux has a few preinstalled variations, not much more hardware choice than Macs on that though, but isn't it really convienient to define it out like that? "Easiest to install except the operating systems that don't
Re: (Score:1)
Show me a piece of hardware that doesn't work on Windows, and it's some obscure thing that once had a Windows driver but the producer stopped making drivers for years ago.
My Canon CanoScan 650U flatbed scanner is about 6 years old and probably good for another 20 given how much I use it. Not supported now or (presumably) ever in Vista. Supported perfectly (and probably indefinitely) in Linux.
I wouldn't rate this as obscure, and it's not one of those things that you might as well replace because the latest m
Re: (Score:1)
And saying it's hard to install makes no sense. OS X is preinstalled and can only be installed on a very, very limited number of computers. You can't just compare them. OS X is not 'better' at installing, it's just out of category.
Well, if it makes you feel any better then you could say Linux doesn't compete in the category 100% of the people wants - computers with operating systems. Of course that'd just start a small flamewar over how Linux took only two clicks to install and how their grandmother could do it. And now Linux has a few preinstalled variations, not much more hardware choice than Macs on that though, but isn't it really convienient to define it out like that? "Easiest to install except the operating systems that don't need installation"? Isn't that something like saying "Cheapest car maintenance except the cars that don't need maintenance"? Is there any reason whatsoever having to install it yourself should be considered a feature? Being easy certainly reduces the drawback, but I can't see the advantage.
Linux is just not in the position to be preinstalled on computers. But if you want to play it that way: when I installed Linux on the laptop of my friend (a brand new laptop, every piece of hardware works) he told me what he needed. That means that the Linux OS on his computer was installed exactly to his needs. That's a lot better than Mac does.
And I prefer a car that needs a little bit of maintenance than a car that needs to be locked and shipped back to the car factory for maintenance.
And Linux still does a lot better than Windows in terms of hardware compatibility.
Show me a piece of hardware that doesn't work on Windows, and it's some obscure thing that once had a Windows driver but the producer stopped making drivers for years ago. I can tell you of plenty current hardware that doesn't work right on Linux though. You can start by getting drivers for my parent's printer or fix that my firewire drive falls asleep (it's a Linux driver issue, yes). And last I tried installing it on my Toshiba laptop it wouldn't even boot the CD...
Okay I'll show yo
Re: (Score:1)
Biggest annoyance for me on the linux desktop is the way Nautilus doesn't support windows style UNC paths or network mounts. If a colleague sends me a link to a file on our shared drive ('s:\filename.txt') I have to translate that into a pathname that nautilus understands. That, and there's no Mozy client.
Well that's just a bad way of transferring file links. There is no guarantee that you have mounted the network drive in Windows on the same drive-letter. Still, Nautilus is open source. So fix it yourself/Ask the geeky kid next door to fix it.
Re: (Score:2)
Nonsense? I can't compare Ubuntu or Fedora to OS X because I don't have enough experience with OS X. But if you compare Ubuntu to Windows, including Vista, then it's obvious the Linux experience sucks.
Don't get me wrong, I install and manage Linux servers, I'm certainly not fond of Windows 2003 and I think Linux servers are easier to maintain, but on the general desktop Linux is miles away from Windows. It can, kind of, do the job after a lot of tweaking, it can be "fun" for someone who sees computers as a
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Get back to your tower of ignorance.
Your post is rather contradictory. You say the kernel is rock solid, yet then say you have video, audio and lock-up issues, which would actually most likely be caused by kernel issues. I doubt the problems really existed, as you have been purposefully scant on details. Also, I have a few different cards from different iterations of the Sound Blaster generations and they are some of the most stable and functional sound cards under Linux, so I think this is just an oversigh
Re: (Score:2)
The overall user experience sucks at best. Go ahead and flame me.
Flame you because...what, you're spouting a lot of unfocused hyperbolic blanket statements, or because you're asking to be flamed?
Last week's installs left a lot to be desired. We started with Fedora core 9 and and had all sorts of video and lock up problems. We abandoned it after three days of trying. The install disk wouldn't even run without a resolution parameter.
Without much in the way of context or so much as a mention of why you cho
Re: (Score:2)
I have two computers at home, even if I wanted to install OS X on them it would not work and it would probably be illegal, I have no intention to buy another computer because these are rather new machines. Oh, and I don't want to use Windows either, plus it's way too expensive and bloated (Vista). Linux and BSD work just fine on my machines...
Re: (Score:2)
I use F9 on a daily basis, and it's a pretty decent (though not great) distro.
Re: (Score:1)
The overall user experience sucks at best. Go ahead and flame me. Last week's installs left a lot to be desired. We started with Fedora core 9 and and had all sorts of video and lock up problems. We abandoned it after three days of trying. The install disk wouldn't even run without a resolution parameter.
Perhaps you know this already, but Fedora is a distro that caters to Linux hobbyists who know what they're doing. To a certain extent, you were asking for some extra work when you chose it.
Sorry to hear about your lockup issues. They are probably driver related, but they will be cleared up eventually. For example, I once had a Broadcom Wireless card that didn't work at all. After using NDisWrapper, the card worked for a while but would lock up the system. One day a kernel update came along and my card was s
Re:those books... (Score:4, Informative)
Linux vs. BSDs (Score:1, Interesting)
Now I would like to compare that with one of the BSDs. The BSD folks should create a similar map so we all could be amazed.
how is this generated? (Score:5, Interesting)
I assume that this isn't manually built. How is it generated? Is the software available for use with other programs?
Re: (Score:1)
I assume that it was. It uses layman's terms ("graphics card", "cam") and is so aesthetic and devoid of cruft that it must be at least primarily the work of human hands.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Wow. (Score:5, Interesting)
May fortune shine on these efforts to flatten out the learning curve.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
In a left-handed sort of way, I can nearly empathize with you, seeing open communication and common sense whittle away at an iron grip on the market.
Nearly.
This homo-erotic outburst of yours is not a good sign. Smitty recommends a mellower approach for the remaining days of your vanity under the sun.
How about getting a shiny new camcorder and trying to make the insane proprietary data format work?
You probably won't succeed, but t
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks to you, as well.
Re: (Score:1)
Here goes:
1011 0011 0011 0011 0011 0011 0000 1100 1100 1100 1100 1110 0110
Reference (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Useful (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You guys have no idea how much of help this is.. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:You guys have no idea how much of help this is. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
More Windows compatibility needed (Score:1)