2 ms·
I'd like to highlight this: >NFS with Kerberos secure, simple, battle tested. no crazy architecture works so well a bug showed up in the kernel :-)
by vrnvu 1y ago
I'd like to highlight this:
>NFS with Kerberos
secure, simple, battle tested. no crazy architecture
works so well a bug showed up in the kernel :-)
- eqvinox 1y ago> works so well a bug showed up in the kernel :-) What exactly are you trying to highlight here? Most code has bugs. This one is someone forgetting to stick to actual behavior described in 1997, it's a mistake, mistakes happen. Which one of "secure", "simple", "battle tested" and "no crazy architecture" do you think this disproves? Or do you think CIFS or Ceph have no bugs?
- gyesxnuibh 1y agoI think they're saying typically the kernel one of the last places you'd expect the bug, so it shows that it is battle tested? I don't think they're being snarky.
- eqvinox 1y agoI didn't really read it as snarky, I just straight up don't understand what they mean (and maybe why that smiley is there?)
- vrnvu 1y agoBy "no crazy architecture" I meant it avoids the modern trend of building monstrous data platforms on top of data meshes, event buses, and layers of cloud abstractions. The kind I sometimes see, hence the smiley :-)
- burnt-resistor 1y agoThe Linux kernel needs to adopt better testing methodologies because they're almost entirely reliant on meatcloud CI than provably-correct code with invariant contracts.