August 21, 2014
 
 
RSSRSS feed

.comment: The Wit and Wisdom of Linus Torvalds - page 4

Glimpses of a Guy You'd Like to Know

  • January 31, 2001
  • By Dennis E. Powell

Shades of Windows, in my opinion: "yeah, we know it is broken, but we preferred some hard-to-trigger filesystem corruption to breaking a legacy program that couldn't understand the new filesystem features."


-----


Either

(a) Solaris has solved the faster-than-light problem, and Sun engineers should get a Nobel prize in physics or something.

(b) Solaris "scales" by being optimized for 10000 entries, and not speeding up sufficiently for a small number of entries.

You make the call.


-----


If I understood the GNU make syntax correctly (which is possibly not the case - GNU make is possibly the only example of "overkill" to rival GNU emacs), this looks like a reasonable idea.


-----


This is why I'd love to not see silly work-arounds in apache: we obviously can fix the places where our performance sucks, but only if we don't have other band-aids hiding the true issues.


-----


Maybe somebody should tell gcc maintainers about programmers that know more than the compiler again.


-----


The fact I dislike about the HP-UX implementation is that it is so obviously stupid.

And I have to say that I absolutely despise the BSD people. They did sendfile() after both Linux and HP-UX had done it, and they must have known about both implementations. And they chose the HP-UX braindamage, and even brag about the fact that they were stupid and didn't understand TCP_CORK (they don't say so in those exact words, of course - they just show that they were stupid and clueless by the things they brag about).

Oh, well. Not everybody can be as goodlooking as me. It's a curse.


-----


Also note how I said that it is the BSD people I despise. Not the HP-UX implementation. The HP-UX one is not pretty, but it works. But I hold open source people to higher standards. They are supposed to be the people who do programming because it's an art-form, not because it's their job.


-----


Think of all the security scares sendmail has historically had. But it's a pretty secure piece of work now - and people know if backwards and forward. Few people advocate switching from sendmail these days (sure, they do exist, but what I'm saying is that a long track record that includes security issues isn't necessarily bad, if it has gotten fixed).

Sitemap | Contact Us