Re: [lq:aide] Les compagnies qui poussent Linux sur le Serveur et ignore les Fans que nous sommes sur Desktop/Laptop/Workstation

Merci beaucoup a tous pour vos input sur le sujet. cest tres interressant de
lire toute ca.
la raison pour laquelle je disait que le "statement" plus haut etait faux
c'est que CK a quitter non seulement parce que son scheduler n'as pas ete
accepter dans 2.6.23 mais egalement dans plusieurs version precedente. la
difference avec 2.6.23 cest qu'ils ont opter pour CFS, mais sinon, ca fait
longtemps (plusieurs annees) quil pousse et personne n'accepte ses
benchmarks comme valide. meme si dautre developpeur on pu verifier et
apporter des modifications a ses patchs

CK proposait egalement d'inclure plusieurs scheduleur dans Linux et
permettre au gens de choisir selon leur besoin. Server vs WorkStation vs
Gaming, etc. Ce qui aurait ete une bonne idee. Refuser, et meme si
techniquement, CK avait tord, ce que j'en retiens c'est que les
investisseurs n'etaient juste pas interresser à s'y attarder. comme le
gouvernement a quebec qui nest pas interresser a remplacer MSOffice par
OpenOffice.

Je crois aussi que CK, n'a pas uniquement travailler sur le scheduler, mais
aussi dautre partie du kernel, toutes dans le but d'ameliorer le temps de
reponse sur Desktop. et cest pas parce que CFS a gagner over SD que CK a
abandonner mais plutot parce qu'il etait tanner que le tout soit trop
POLITIQUE plutot que Technique/Realiste.

On Nov 14, 2007 3:19 PM, Claude Boucher (mailing lists) <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Mathieu Jobin a écrit :
> > Oui je sais que la nouvelle est veille, mais ca reste d'actualite et
> > tres important pour l'avenir du desktop.
> > dailleur, avoir avoir lu ton petit resume je vois tres bien que tu n'as
> > pas vraiment compris ce quil se passe.
> > tu devrais lire l'interview au complet.
>
> J'ai lu l'entrevue ET ce que Linus en pensait. Voici ce qu'il disait de
> l'attitude de CK dans un courriel qu'il envoyait à lkml le 28 juillet
> dernier (source: http://kerneltrap.org/node/14008). Je pense que ça vaut
> la peine de citer intégralement, pour démasquer le FUD à ce sujet:
>
> > From: Linus Torvalds [email blocked]
> > Subject: Re: [ck] Re: Linus 2.6.23-rc1
> > Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 10:12:32 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 28 Jul 2007, Jonathan Jessup wrote:
> >>
> >> Linus, there is a complaint about the Linux kernel, this complaint is
> that
> >> the Linux kernel isn't giving priorities to desktop interactivity and
> >> experience. The response on osnews.com etc have shown that there is
> public
> >> demand for it too.
> >
> > No, the response on osnews.com only shows that there are a lot of
> armchair
> > complainers around.
> >
> > People are suggesting that you'd have a separate "desktop kernel".
> That's
> > insane. It also shows total ignorance of maintainership, and reality.
> And
> > I bet most of the people there haven't tested _either_ scheduler, they
> > just like making statements.
> >
> > The fact is, I've _always_ considered the desktop to be the most
> important
> > part. And I suspect that that actually is true for most kernel
> developers,
> > because quite frankly, that's what 99% of them ends up using. If a
> kernel
> > developer uses Windows for his day-to-day work, I sure as hell wouldn't
> > want to have him developing Linux. That has nothing to do with anything
> > anti-windows: but the whole "eat your own dogfood" is a very fundamental
> > thing, and somebody who doesn't do that shouldn't be allowed to be even
> > _close_ to a compiler!
> >
> > So the whole argument about how kernel developers think that the desktop
> > isn't important is totally made-up crap by Con, and then parrotted by
> > osnews and other places.
> >
> > The fact is, most kernel developers realize that Linux is used in
> > different places, on different machines, and with different loads. You
> > cannot make _everybody_ happy, but you can try to do as good a job as
> > possible. And doing "as good a job as possible" very much includes not
> > focusing on any particular load.
> >
> > And btw, "the desktop" isn't actually one single load. It's in fact a
> lot
> > of very different loads, and different people want different things.
> What
> > makes the desktop so interesting is in fact that it shows more varied
> > usage than any other niche - and no, 3D gaming isn't "it".
> >
> >> Maybe once or twice Con couldn't help or fix an issue but isn't that
> what
> >> open source software is all about anyway?
> >
> > That's not the issue.
> >
> > Con wass fixated on one thing, and one thing only, and wasn't interested
> > in anythign else - and attacked people who complained. Compare that to
> > Ingo, who saw that what Con's scheduler did was good, and tried to solve
> > the problems of people who complained.
> >
> > The ck mailing list is/was also apparently filled with people who all
> had
> > the same issues, which is seriously the *wrong* thing to do. It means
> that
> > any "consensus" coming out of that kind of private list is totally
> > worthless, because the people you ask are already in agreement - you
> have
> > a so-called "selection bias", and they just reinforce their own
> opinions.
> >
> > Which is why I don't trust mailing lists with a narrow topic. They are
> > _useless_. If you cannot get many different people from _different_
> areas
> > to test your patches, and cannot see the big picture, the end result
> won't
> > likely be very interesting to others, will it?
> >
> > The fact is, _any_ scheduler is going to have issues. I will bet you
> > almost any amount of money that people are going to complain about
> Ingo's
> > scheduler when 2.6.23 is released. That's not the issue: the issue is
> that
> > the exact same thing would have happened with CK too.
> >
> > So if you are going to have issues with the scheduler, which one do you
> > pick: the one where the maintainer has shown that he can maintain
> > schedulers for years, can can address problems from _different_ areas of
> > life? Or the one where the maintainer argues against people who report
> > problems, and is fixated on one single load?
> >
> > That's really what it boils down to. I was actually planning to merge CK
> > for a while. The _code_ didn't faze me.
> >
> >                       Linus
>
>


-- 
Read my Blog at http://blog.somekool.net/
Take the control over your money, track your expenses http://justbudget.com
Everyone is trying their hardest to do their job but management has set it
up so that it's impossible.

Mathieu