Make BSD great again.
it's always been great
Lol no.
Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules
81–90 of 104 posts
Re: Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules
#82Re: Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
All in all Linux (the kernel) has a really toxic environment. If you like a more friendly community and still want to work on a Kernel go to Net/Freebsd, Haiku or OmniosCE. With Linux (the kernel) you are not allowed to make mistakes or ask (stupid?) questions.
Oh stop the bullshit and hyperbolic hand waving. The Linux kernel community is way more friendly place to work than any of the BSD kernel communities.
Yeah linux, its a lovely place ;)
Just curios...why are you so against BSD's (looking at you comments) is it a Fanboy thing? Are you fighting also so hard witch distribution is the best? :)
Re: Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
>need to be more polite about rejecting low quality work is puzzling to me. First, it's not low quality Second, for sure you have to be polite if you don't pay him (but even when you do, you should) Third, imagine a 16yo get smashed like that (not that i say he is) and what a devastating and demotivating thing that could be...welcome to the linux world Overall, those Superstar Linux dev's are mostly ignorant borderli…
You are right, it's not low quality, it's high quality attack on whole culture. But please come up with real examples, did linux devs ever like "smashed 16yo"? Also, why don't you set an example and express yourself politely too?
>Also, why don't you set an example and express yourself politely too
Because i can:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caOq2rDe_C0
EDIT: Oh yeah a attack on a culture...what culture? The Fuck you NVIDIA but we send you firmware because otherwise nothing will work? That Culture?
Re: Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules
#85Re: Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I agree that these responses are rude, patches like this are the lkml equivalent of taking a dump in someones backyard... It might very well be that the submitter didn't know that, the documentation on what will be flat out rejected is not very explicit. But a compile-time dependency on a non-gpl module should be very self-evident, and the documentation explicitly asks people to go and learn about how the GPL w…
No! A flawed patch is not the equivalent of "taking a dump" in someone's yard. Proposing a flawed patch is not a contemptuous act, it's not insulting, and it is not injurious. Treating it as such is the problem. Telling someone they "should not be anywhere near Linux kernel development" and to "just go away" is degrading and contemptuous.
Go work a month with these kernel maintainers and then come back and report how you feel about having to review these turds.
Re: Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
No! A flawed patch is not the equivalent of "taking a dump" in someone's yard. Proposing a flawed patch is not a contemptuous act, it's not insulting, and it is not injurious. Treating it as such is the problem. Telling someone they "should not be anywhere near Linux kernel development" and to "just go away" is degrading and contemptuous.
...and right thing to do in these circumstances.
No! Talking or writing about another person like that (in public) is shameful for that Guy and for that Hellwig Clown (the guy who lost against VMware) too. If you say something like that in private..ok, not nice but acceptable but NOT in Public that should be absolute clear for any decent human being.
Re: Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules
#88It seems reasonable to reject the patch for technical and legal reasons, but it's pretty disappointing to see toxic comments from prominent kernel developers like: > "Seriously? If you only even considered this is something reasonable to do you should not be anywhere near Linux kernel development. Just go away!" https://lwn.net/ml/netdev/20200727073509.GB3917@lst.de/ https://lwn.net/ml/netdev/20200728064706.GA21377@l…
> "Seriously? If you only even considered this is something reasonable to do > you should not be anywhere near Linux kernel development. Just go away!" A response like this would get you a serious talkin' to at just about any place I've worked. Possibly fired, if it was consistent behavior. I don't care if you're Donald Knuth, Dennis Ritchie and Edgar Djikstra all rolled into one, act like a jerk and you're off of my…
That is on point, Thanks.
Re: Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
No! A flawed patch is not the equivalent of "taking a dump" in someone's yard. Proposing a flawed patch is not a contemptuous act, it's not insulting, and it is not injurious. Treating it as such is the problem. Telling someone they "should not be anywhere near Linux kernel development" and to "just go away" is degrading and contemptuous.
Go work a month with these kernel maintainers and then come back and report how you feel about having to review these turds.
>review these turds
Are you talking about the Kernel-maintainers or the Patches?
Re: Netgpu and the hazards of proprietary kernel modules
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a user and downstream developer, I'm glad that the Linux maintainers are committed to maintaining a sound architecture. The idea that they need to be more polite about rejecting low quality work is puzzling to me.
Imagine believing that Linux has a "sound architecture".
Hehe...Cheers buddy.