In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kadaitcha Man
<nospam@rainx.cjb.net>
wrote
on Sun, 1 Feb 2004 02:18:17 -0800 (PST)
<im1O7lx6tAW3191B89A29bH6kP9CMiXn@one.us-ent-magazine.com>:
> In a discussion with some others, I raised the question of the
> distinction of the kernel from the rest of the distribution when
> referring to the whole distribution as "linux."
>
> The point being that the underlying assumption is that linux is more
> than just the kernel. "linux" is everything that is distributed in a
> distro, add-on tools and utilities, scripts, servers, and GUIs.
>
> It is an important point on the grounds that it seems to me that when
> the linux-nazis (you know who you are) are on a loser, they move the
> focus of the discussion of "linux" away from all its layered trappings
> and claim that "linux is only the kernel".
>
> This is a direct quote from the comp.os.linux FAQ - part 1 of 6. It
> appears in the opening section.
>
> "Most people, however, refer to the operating system kernel, system
> software, and application software, collectively, as "Linux," and that
> convention is used in this FAQ as well."
>
> So, technically, linux is the kernel, but the accepted convention is to
> "refer to the operating system kernel, system software, and application
> software, collectively, as "Linux,"" This must be the case since Linus
> Torvalds, as owner of the name "linux" has made no attempt to prevent
> the technical distinction being completely blurred by the convention of
> non-distinction. There is no record of any such attempt that I am aware of.
>
> It makes sense that Torvalds would allow the technical distinction to be
> blurred by the above convention because the reference to all the add-ons
> to the linux kernel of linux as being linux in total actually promotes
> and encourages use of his work, not to mention making it seem bigger and
> better than it really is.
>
> So, linux-nazis, there you have it. No longer will you be able to weedle
> your way out of a discussion by dissing the argument on the grounds that
> "linux is only the kernel". The point is, when considering the
> semantics, Linux is the kernel of an operating system that also happens
> to be called Linux. Of course, with you linux-nazis being such
> dumb****s, the semantic notions of difference will be completely lost
> upon you.

Your position is noted. All of my bugs dismissible against "Linux"
on the ground that they are not part of the kernel are hereby
reactivated. (Not that they ever were all that dead...)

These include but are not limited to:

[1] Multi-server limited-memory video failure crash.
Briefly put: start 2 X servers on a 4 MB video card.
Flip between them until the system gets futzed, then
hit CR and watch the system do weird video things until
it freezes. Unknown whether this is a video driver
bug, an X bug, or what. I hope 2.6/4.3 fixes it.
It doesn't bite often, fortunately, as I don't normally
run in a "2-server" mode.

[2] Galeon crash bug. Admittedly, I think the bug may be
in Adobe's SVG Linux plugin, but it counts. It's sort
of a "driver"; personally, I'd love to find a GPL/LGPL
equivalent. (Unless Adobe's released the source?)

[3] Konqueror crash/freeze bug. To be fair, this is a
2.2 bug but there's something in there that's quite
unhappy. I'm hoping 3.0 fixes it. I'll find out once
Gentoo gets more cooperative.

[4] Gtk focus bug. Briefly put: recall that Windows can
easily switch between controls by using TAB, and
one can throw away the mouse in Windows (except
perhaps for selecting the actual window within which
to navigate, and even then it should be possible to
flip through them). One can also navigate using arrow
keys and hotkeys. Can one do the same in Gtk or Qt?
Motif at least made a gallant attempt, and for the
most part worked.

[5] Server crash recovery. This is more of an enhancement
than a bug, and unfortunately it is far from clear how
one can apply the techniques to such things as xterms,
but briefly put, all X applications should implement
all aspects of ICCCM session management, which would
include the ability to restart after an X server crash
exactly where they had left off. Most of the machinery
is already there so let's finish the job.

[6] The deadly overpage bug. This is actually more of a
feature but will confuse a lot of users. Basically, one
can ask for 4 GB of virtual memory on a 256 megabyte
machine, but the minute an application asks for a
page Linux cannot grant, Linux kills the process.
(AIUI, It doesn't matter whether that app is the one
asking for the 4GB of memory or not.) It's a nice
illustration of how virtual virtual memory can be.
Note that most classical Unixes will disallow this
overallocation, unless they actually have swap space
already allocated thereto. I don't know what NT/2k/XP
will do but suspect it will try to extend the paging
file once page requests come in, fragmenting it.

[7] The ability to invoke native .EXE/PE code. Another
feature enhancement, which will basically merge WinE
with Linux, or perhaps just invoke WinE if the Linux
kernel sees a PE signature. Over 90% of applications
are Windows-based so this should be a big win -- and
not all that difficult a patch, as someone already
patched Linux to run Java .class files, for example.
(x86 machines only.)

[8] Various "missing driver" bugs for proprietary devices such
as winmodems.

[9] An implementation for Director. This comes under
missing Linux functionality. Ditto for WMA.
Hopefully Quicktime codecs are available.

There's probably a few more, but these are the ones that
come to mind.

[.sigsnip]

--
#191, [email]ewill3@earthlink.net[/email]
It's still legal to go .sigless.

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Gregory Toomey
<nospam@bigpond.com>
wrote
on Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:52:25 +1000
<bvisu0$sn0ip$1@ID-202028.news.uni-berlin.de>:
> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>
>> In a discussion with some others, I raised the question of the
>> distinction of the kernel from the rest of the distribution when
>> referring to the whole distribution as "linux."
>>
>> The point being that the underlying assumption is that linux is more
>> than just the kernel. "linux" is everything that is distributed in a
>> distro, add-on tools and utilities, scripts, servers, and GUIs.
>>
>> It is an important point on the grounds that it seems to me that when
>> the linux-nazis (you know who you are) are on a loser, they move the
>> focus of the discussion of "linux" away from all its layered trappings
>> and claim that "linux is only the kernel".
>>
>> This is a direct quote from the comp.os.linux FAQ - part 1 of 6. It
>> appears in the opening section.
>>
>> "Most people, however, refer to the operating system kernel, system
>> software, and application software, collectively, as "Linux," and that
>> convention is used in this FAQ as well."
>>
>> So, technically, linux is the kernel, but the accepted convention is to
>> "refer to the operating system kernel, system software, and application
>> software, collectively, as "Linux,"" This must be the case since Linus
>> Torvalds, as owner of the name "linux" has made no attempt to prevent
>> the technical distinction being completely blurred by the convention of
>> non-distinction. There is no record of any such attempt that I am aware
>> of.
>>
>> It makes sense that Torvalds would allow the technical distinction to be
>> blurred by the above convention because the reference to all the add-ons
>> to the linux kernel of linux as being linux in total actually promotes
>> and encourages use of his work, not to mention making it seem bigger and
>> better than it really is.
>>
>> So, linux-nazis, there you have it. No longer will you be able to weedle
>> your way out of a discussion by dissing the argument on the grounds that
>> "linux is only the kernel". The point is, when considering the
>> semantics, Linux is the kernel of an operating system that also happens
>> to be called Linux. Of course, with you linux-nazis being such
>> dumb****s, the semantic notions of difference will be completely lost
>> upon you.
>>
>
> Yes it does get murky, as the C compiler that linux uses is GNU, and many of
> the utilities are GNU.
>
> If you want Linux running on embedded devices then you may only want the
> kernel, or even just a part of it.
>
> But compare Linux to FreeBSD, which runs on 20 different architectures.
> [url]http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/index.html[/url]
> FreeBSD comes with disk management, lots of TCPIP/IP utilities (DNS, NFS,
> PPP); the kernel is an integral part of the whole operating system.
>
>
> Summing up:
> Linux
> Advantages - kernel developed separately from the result of the system;
> can embed small kernel in devices,
> specialist distros like smoothwall
> Disadvantages - different distros implement things in different ways
> resulting in each version of each distro having different bugs
>
>
> BSD
> Advantages - kernel + operating system in the distro means you have
> standard commands across architectures
> Disadvantages - lack of specialist distros
>
>
> gtoomey

You forgot a couple:

Windows XP.
Advantages:
Runs on over 90% of new x86 hardware.
Embeddable.
Industry standard (de facto).
Instantly recognizable.
Disadvantages:
Cost.
Instantly recognizable.

VMS.
Advantages:
Old Reliable.
Disadvantages:
Only runs on VAX-compatible hardware.
(Is there a GUI? The last one I remember for it was back in
the VS100 days...)

CP/M:
AmigaDOS:
AtariTOS:
BeOS:
FreeDOS:
GEM:

I could go on.... :-)

--
#191, [email]ewill3@earthlink.net[/email]
It's still legal to go .sigless.

The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

> VMS.
> Advantages:
> Old Reliable.
> Disadvantages:
> Only runs on VAX-compatible hardware.
> (Is there a GUI? The last one I remember for it was back in
> the VS100 days...)

X.

--
Kadaitcha Man: Registered Linux User #344402
Akhenaten: Registered Linux Machine #235500

--
Your Free Insult: Thou predermining, bejeweling, mecopterous skunk lanterning hymen.

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, John Bailo
<jabailo@earthlink.net>
wrote
on Sun, 01 Feb 2004 17:27:16 GMT
<UFaTb.7877$uM2.616@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.n et>:
> flatfish+++ wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 06:00:18 -0800 (PST), "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@rainx.cjb.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I snipped the spam. If I wanted a ****ing sales pitch on BSD, I would
>>>have asked for it, you stupid, belly-crawling snake-oil vendor.
>>
>>
>> That's a classic!!
>>
>> flatfish+++
>>
>
> Tard.
>

He does have a point though. This is supposed to be a Linux
advocacy group or an XP OS group (depending on which side
of this crosspost one is on), not a FreeBSD sales channel. :-)

Then again, I'm going to have to install FreeBSD again on at
least one machine, if only as a secondary OS.

I'm kinda hoping the two will merge someday although I'm not
entirely certain as to the precise logistics, as it would
mean Linus et al and the BSD group (whoever they are) would
have to work together -- and I have *no* idea as to the
social dynamics of any of this bunch. :-)

--
#191, [email]ewill3@earthlink.net[/email]
It's still legal to go .sigless.

On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 05:00:35 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, John Bailo
> <jabailo@earthlink.net>
> wrote
> on Sun, 01 Feb 2004 17:27:16 GMT
> <UFaTb.7877$uM2.616@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.n et>:
>> flatfish+++ wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 06:00:18 -0800 (PST), "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@rainx.cjb.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I snipped the spam. If I wanted a ****ing sales pitch on BSD, I would
>>>>have asked for it, you stupid, belly-crawling snake-oil vendor.
>>>
>>>
>>> That's a classic!!
>>>
>>> flatfish+++
>>>
>>
>> Tard.
>>
>
> He does have a point though. This is supposed to be a Linux
> advocacy group or an XP OS group (depending on which side
> of this crosspost one is on), not a FreeBSD sales channel. :-)
>
> Then again, I'm going to have to install FreeBSD again on at
> least one machine, if only as a secondary OS.
>
> I'm kinda hoping the two will merge someday although I'm not
> entirely certain as to the precise logistics, as it would
> mean Linus et al and the BSD group (whoever they are) would
> have to work together -- and I have *no* idea as to the
> social dynamics of any of this bunch. :-)

A BSDer is a social retard. I think that about sums it up.

Kadaitcha Man wrote:


> I snipped the spam. If I wanted a ****ing sales pitch on BSD, I would
> have asked for it, you stupid, belly-crawling snake-oil vendor.
>

You got some serious issues, really.

--
Jarkko Oranen <choubaka.N@ihme.org>
[url]http://www.ihme.org/~choubaka[/url]
Address is invalid - remove the ".N"

Kadaitcha Man wrote:

> No, not at all. I don't have a problem with anything I do. And if you
> don't like what I do, well, that's your ****ing problem.

Yes, and we get to hear it, 10 times an hour, every hour.



--
*W '04* <:> Open Source <:> Open Competition

Jarkko Oranen wrote:
> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>
>
>> I snipped the spam. If I wanted a ****ing sales pitch on BSD, I would
>> have asked for it, you stupid, belly-crawling snake-oil vendor.
>>
>
> You got some serious issues, really.

No, not at all. I don't have a problem with anything I do. And if you
don't like what I do, well, that's your ****ing problem.

--
Kadaitcha Man: Registered Linux User #344402
Akhenaten: Registered Linux Machine #235500

--
Your Free Insult: Thou instancing, twittering, left over piece of **** wanting futtock.

John Bailo wrote:
> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>
>> No, not at all. I don't have a problem with anything I do. And if you
>> don't like what I do, well, that's your ****ing problem.
>
>
> Yes, and we get to hear it, 10 times an hour, every hour.

If you don't like that then that's your ****ing problem.

--
Kadaitcha Man: Registered Linux User #344402
Akhenaten: Registered Linux Machine #235500

--
Your Free Insult: Thou answering, ineyeing, animated headache wagering bladder.

Hank Kimball wrote:

> A BSDer is a social retard. I think that about sums it up.

Keep up the good work with the "BSD is dying" posts from your mom's
basement. Well, I'm not wasting any more time with you, you illiterate
redneck moron. Because I know one thing. You'll never, ever,
contribute anything to the Linux kernel. You're simply too dumb.



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
[url]http://www.newsfeeds.com[/url] - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

chrisv wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 02:18:17 -0800, Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>
>
>>(snip)
>
>
> *plonk*
>
> (You post too much crap)

*plonk*

So do you.

--
Kadaitcha Man: Registered Linux User #344402
Akhenaten: Registered Linux Machine #235500

--
Your Free Insult: Thou acting, boozing, craven bighead lionising shrimp.

The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kadaitcha Man
> <nospam@rainx.cjb.net>
> wrote
> on Sun, 1 Feb 2004 18:47:27 -0800 (PST)
> <vf44ttCdVCAq188155C8KUc2jEUF8Zj5@ns.1stoppubspot. com>:
>
>>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>>
>>>VMS.
>>>Advantages:
>>> Old Reliable.
>>>Disadvantages:
>>> Only runs on VAX-compatible hardware.
>>> (Is there a GUI? The last one I remember for it was back in
>>> the VS100 days...)
>>
>>X.
>
>
> Hm. X is not a GUI as such, just an underplatform.
> Did they take Motif, Gtk, Qt, or what?

Offhand, I cannot recall.

--
Kadaitcha Man: Registered Linux User #344402
Akhenaten: Registered Linux Machine #235500

--
Your Free Insult: Thou climatising, sabering, homegrown foot-licker vaulting **** eater.

Donn Miller wrote:

> And I've got plenty of friends, thank you very much. I'm no "social
> retard".

Self-deception is such a *****.

--
Kadaitcha Man: Registered Linux User #344402
Akhenaten: Registered Linux Machine #235500

--
Your Free Insult: Thou infamising, befogging, incessant kidney voting hand job.

The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
<snip>
> Where's Greycloud when we really *need* him? :-)

oo-
That's possible?
8-o
--
- relic -
They call it PMS because Mad Cow Disease was already taken.

The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kadaitcha Man
> <nospam@rainx.cjb.net>
> wrote
> on Mon, 2 Feb 2004 14:42:54 -0800 (PST)
> <cyWZ6GKthCni7490B636tRj8ycYmSYQO@[url]www.1ecomnet.com[/url]>:
>> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kadaitcha Man
>>> <nospam@rainx.cjb.net>
>>> wrote
>>> on Sun, 1 Feb 2004 18:47:27 -0800 (PST)
>>> <vf44ttCdVCAq188155C8KUc2jEUF8Zj5@ns.1stoppubspot. com>:
>>>
>>>>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>VMS.
>>>>>Advantages:
>>>>> Old Reliable.
>>>>>Disadvantages:
>>>>> Only runs on VAX-compatible hardware.
>>>>> (Is there a GUI? The last one I remember for it was back in
>>>>> the VS100 days...)
>>>>
>>>>X.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hm. X is not a GUI as such, just an underplatform.
>>> Did they take Motif, Gtk, Qt, or what?
>>
>> Offhand, I cannot recall.
>
> And I never used X on VMS. (We never upgraded VMS3.7 where I worked
> at the time, and my subsequent employer didn't have VAXen.)
>
> Where's Greycloud when we really *need* him? :-)
>
> [.sigsnip]
>

I didn't think you could run X on VMS. I only knew it as DEC Windows which
ran on Ultrix. As you say, GreyCloud can "uncloud" this question.