4 ms·

This seems like one of those false "tyranny of the OR" logic bombs: we can have 1) high quality software OR 2) a kernel debugger. It seems to me that these tw

This seems like one of those false "tyranny of the OR" logic bombs: we can have 1) high quality software OR 2) a kernel debugger. It seems to me that these two things are not actually logically connected and we can have both: underthought code is a unrelated problem to a debugger. Its like saying you can't build world class woodwork if you have a router. Instead you must only have awls so you have plenty of time to think about it. It strikes me that simply means there will be less software in the world at much higher dev cost and that isn't a good thing necessarily.

blowski 11y ago
The other false dichotomy here is: You can be 1) a nice person or 2) a good manager. That Linus can't get good results without "being a bastard" is a shortcoming, not a management style to be admired and emulated.
DSMan195276 11y ago
I wouldn't say you're particularly wrong, and as someone who does kernel development I can't say I agree with Linus here (though I may very well have in 2000 when he wrote this) - I use GDB to debug my kernel a fair amount, but it's also 2016 and it's rare that GDB helps besides notifying me when a condition happened and killing everything. I think I understand his point though. Kernel debuggers aren't amazing by any means, not at all comparable to standard application debuggers, and a lot of the actual hard problems you run into when dealing with a kernel can't be easily solved by debuggers anyway. Single-stepping through kernel code is filled with bugs and he's right when saying you can't really trust it. Kernel debuggers can be helpful, there's no denying that, but if you're relying on a kernel debugger to solve your problems then you're doing it wrong, and I think that's his point. There's too much that could go wrong that a kernel debugger couldn't easily catch for you - And I'm sure the debuggers in 2000 weren't as good as the ones we have now. Not having a debugger removes the risk of people doing that, and he'd rather have less kernel developers that are more aware of the code they're writing, then more that don't know as much about it.
VLM 11y ago
A better woodworking analogy (or parody) would be: Gentlemen, I am well aware that many woodworking shops have a FooBar2000 scrap wood burner. This shop will not. I am not saying woodburners are always bad, or the FooBar2000 is individually bad. Or pretending that scrap never happens. Why I enjoy a warm toasty winter night in front of a fire like the next lad. However having a scrap wood burner implies we create scrap that needs burning. And I will not tolerate that in my shop, nor encourage other shop owners to recklessly generate scrap. Gentlemen, here we make keels of ships. The entire ship relies on this keel never breaking, creaking, cracking, groaning. Upon those ships... Lives depend. Businesses depend. Governments depend. And I will not tolerate scrap as a boat keel and all the destruction failure can cause. Therefore given that we can't afford to create scrap, we will work slowly and methodically and intelligently so as to not create scrap, and thus have nothing to burn in the FooBar2000 scrap wood burner, thus we do not need one. In the unlikely event that I or someone else make a keel that needed some scrap to be disposed of, well, if it tests good, thats OK. But I'd never tell a dude setting up his own shop that if he's going to build boat keels he badly needs a FooBar 2000 scrap wood burner because he'll probably screw up a lot, because if he's screwing up a lot, I don't want the world depending on his boat keels and I won't accept that caliber of workmanship in my shops nor stamp my name on it. Gentlemen, you may not like my opinion about your deeply held beliefs about woodworking. I sympathize. I don't agree with everyone else either. Thus I'll give you a psychological outlet by talking like a pirate for a bit now, and making light of your mother's parentage and something about elderberries. Thus if you're insulted by my technical evaluation of your woodworking skills, you can tell everyone else you're actually insulted by my talking like a pirate. Then everyone goes home happy, and the world gets safe strong indestructible boat keels.
- unusximmortalis 11y ago
  LOL
twic 11y ago
As an example, FreeBSD has a kernel debugger: https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/developers-handbook/kerneldebug-online-ddb.html https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/developers-handbook/ker... And better code than Linux.

blowski 11y ago

The other false dichotomy here is: You can be 1) a nice person or 2) a good manager. That Linus can't get good results without "being a bastard" is a shortcoming, not a management style to be admired and emulated.

DSMan195276 11y ago

I wouldn't say you're particularly wrong, and as someone who does kernel development I can't say I agree with Linus here (though I may very well have in 2000 when he wrote this) - I use GDB to debug my kernel a fair amount, but it's also 2016 and it's rare that GDB helps besides notifying me when a condition happened and killing everything. I think I understand his point though. Kernel debuggers aren't amazing by any means, not at all comparable to standard application debuggers, and a lot of the actual hard problems you run into when dealing with a kernel can't be easily solved by debuggers anyway. Single-stepping through kernel code is filled with bugs and he's right when saying you can't really trust it. Kernel debuggers can be helpful, there's no denying that, but if you're relying on a kernel debugger to solve your problems then you're doing it wrong, and I think that's his point. There's too much that could go wrong that a kernel debugger couldn't easily catch for you - And I'm sure the debuggers in 2000 weren't as good as the ones we have now. Not having a debugger removes the risk of people doing that, and he'd rather have less kernel developers that are more aware of the code they're writing, then more that don't know as much about it.

VLM 11y ago

A better woodworking analogy (or parody) would be: Gentlemen, I am well aware that many woodworking shops have a FooBar2000 scrap wood burner. This shop will not. I am not saying woodburners are always bad, or the FooBar2000 is individually bad. Or pretending that scrap never happens. Why I enjoy a warm toasty winter night in front of a fire like the next lad. However having a scrap wood burner implies we create scrap that needs burning. And I will not tolerate that in my shop, nor encourage other shop owners to recklessly generate scrap. Gentlemen, here we make keels of ships. The entire ship relies on this keel never breaking, creaking, cracking, groaning. Upon those ships... Lives depend. Businesses depend. Governments depend. And I will not tolerate scrap as a boat keel and all the destruction failure can cause. Therefore given that we can't afford to create scrap, we will work slowly and methodically and intelligently so as to not create scrap, and thus have nothing to burn in the FooBar2000 scrap wood burner, thus we do not need one. In the unlikely event that I or someone else make a keel that needed some scrap to be disposed of, well, if it tests good, thats OK. But I'd never tell a dude setting up his own shop that if he's going to build boat keels he badly needs a FooBar 2000 scrap wood burner because he'll probably screw up a lot, because if he's screwing up a lot, I don't want the world depending on his boat keels and I won't accept that caliber of workmanship in my shops nor stamp my name on it. Gentlemen, you may not like my opinion about your deeply held beliefs about woodworking. I sympathize. I don't agree with everyone else either. Thus I'll give you a psychological outlet by talking like a pirate for a bit now, and making light of your mother's parentage and something about elderberries. Thus if you're insulted by my technical evaluation of your woodworking skills, you can tell everyone else you're actually insulted by my talking like a pirate. Then everyone goes home happy, and the world gets safe strong indestructible boat keels.

unusximmortalis 11y ago
LOL

twic 11y ago

As an example, FreeBSD has a kernel debugger: https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/developers-handbook/kerneldebug-online-ddb.html https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/developers-handbook/ker... And better code than Linux.