5 ms·

But it's not a single failure mode. Indeed, any time the X server crashes, every open X app is lost.

jacquesm 17y ago
Right, and every time Microsoft Windows crashes you lose all your applications as well. Sorry, but Vista does not solve that problem, I don't have any experience with windows 7 so I can't comment on that. All I know is that even if I do something simple on a windows box it requires a reboot. Which pretty much happens every couple of days when you really work a lot with windows, which will reset the counter but will not count as a 'crash'.
- planckscnst 17y ago
  Yeah, but I didn't say when Linux crashes, I said when the X server crashes. When the equivalent happens in Windows, well, if you read the article, you know what happens.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    For those rare cases when a windows display driver crash will not take the whole machine with it (usually by freezing or bluescreening) you might get out of it that way. But for the majority of those cases you'll have very little choice but to reach for the power button and keep it pressed for 10 very long seconds. Again, this is anecdotal, but I have never seen windows recover from any kind of crash in a graceful way. There are several layers to this stuff, hardware, driver, display server, window manager + applications. If any layer 'below' your application crashes you're lucky to keep your data (whatever the operating system). Now, I don't do the things the author refers to (switching screen modes to full screen and back and stuff like that), which might easily be why I never see these issues and for him they are common. But to suggest that in windows (where the lines between the layers are much more blurry than they should be) is 'crash proof' in any way shape or measure has me chuckling a bit. My linux machines (servers & desktops) go down when: - the power fails - I have to move - I upgrade kernels - hardware failures (mostly disks, occasionally a power supply or a memory bank) Other than that they're on, up & running 24x7 year after year.
    - thras 17y ago
      My graphics driver crashed on Vista just yesterday. The screen flashed and I got a nice pop-up in the bottom right corner telling me that the display driver just had to be restarted. How many machines are you running Vista on, anyway? Now, I have lots of Linux crash stories. But I run a lot more Linux servers than you do, so of course I would.
      - jacquesm 17y ago
        I'm happy to hear you run lots more linux servers than I do, as I said before, it is all anecdotal evidence, and so should be taken with a lump of salt. We have exactly one machine running vista here, it's fairly new and it has crashed more than all our linux machines combined. So, just out of curiosity, how many linux machines do you have ?
        thras 17y ago
        A few dozen. I won't tell you guys how to troubleshoot your crashing Vista machine, but the OS isn't at all the first place I'd look to find the problem. Most Vista boxes don't ever crash. Mine certainly don't. On the server side of things (Windows Server versus RHEL, say) my impression is that Microsoft outcompetes Redhat on stability. Just not on cost.
        jacquesm 17y ago
        You should have checked my profile I guess before you made your claim ;) Anyway, a few dozen is pretty good, more than most people have. I figured you were owner of a large outfit that runs thousands of machines. That's when you start to get interesting statistics.
        thras 17y ago
        Hmm. I just have a lot of trouble believing that you run lots and lots of machines and yet have never seen a kernel crash.
- imbaczek 17y ago
  i don't get what the eff windows has to do with X server crashes taking down X apps? "Windows does it too" IS NOT an acceptable solution.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    True. But the point was that X doesn't do it in my experience, maybe I'm unique, maybe not you'll need more numbers. But the ONE windows box we have here has the same problem. So I could make the exact opposite case ("windows crashes, X does not, windows should learn from 'X'") and it would still just be anecdotal evidence. The author suggests that windows has 'the solution' for these kinds of crashes, that is why saying but windows does it too is relevant, it somewhat negates his assertion. If windows would really be rock solid I think I would have a different experience, and - sadly - I'm not alone in that. What the underlying reasons are is anybodies guess, but by bitching about it it is not going to get solved. His parting shot is: "I'm sure the blame-game will be played thoroughly in the comments, but it will only detract from the real problem here. The Linux desktop needs a modern, robust, and advanced graphics stack, which makes sure that crashes and bugs remain isolated, without them affecting the users' work. Microsoft has shown us how it's done, now all the X world needs to do is follow." Whereas if he would simply contact the maintainers of the code with a reproducible error and a stacktrace I'm sure they'd be happy to help.

Right, and every time Microsoft Windows crashes you lose all your applications as well. Sorry, but Vista does not solve that problem, I don't have any experience with windows 7 so I can't comment on that. All I know is that even if I do something simple on a windows box it requires a reboot. Which pretty much happens every couple of days when you really work a lot with windows, which will reset the counter but will not count as a 'crash'.

planckscnst 17y ago
Yeah, but I didn't say when Linux crashes, I said when the X server crashes. When the equivalent happens in Windows, well, if you read the article, you know what happens.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  For those rare cases when a windows display driver crash will not take the whole machine with it (usually by freezing or bluescreening) you might get out of it that way. But for the majority of those cases you'll have very little choice but to reach for the power button and keep it pressed for 10 very long seconds. Again, this is anecdotal, but I have never seen windows recover from any kind of crash in a graceful way. There are several layers to this stuff, hardware, driver, display server, window manager + applications. If any layer 'below' your application crashes you're lucky to keep your data (whatever the operating system). Now, I don't do the things the author refers to (switching screen modes to full screen and back and stuff like that), which might easily be why I never see these issues and for him they are common. But to suggest that in windows (where the lines between the layers are much more blurry than they should be) is 'crash proof' in any way shape or measure has me chuckling a bit. My linux machines (servers & desktops) go down when: - the power fails - I have to move - I upgrade kernels - hardware failures (mostly disks, occasionally a power supply or a memory bank) Other than that they're on, up & running 24x7 year after year.
  - thras 17y ago
    My graphics driver crashed on Vista just yesterday. The screen flashed and I got a nice pop-up in the bottom right corner telling me that the display driver just had to be restarted. How many machines are you running Vista on, anyway? Now, I have lots of Linux crash stories. But I run a lot more Linux servers than you do, so of course I would.
    - jacquesm 17y ago
      I'm happy to hear you run lots more linux servers than I do, as I said before, it is all anecdotal evidence, and so should be taken with a lump of salt. We have exactly one machine running vista here, it's fairly new and it has crashed more than all our linux machines combined. So, just out of curiosity, how many linux machines do you have ?
      - thras 17y ago
        A few dozen. I won't tell you guys how to troubleshoot your crashing Vista machine, but the OS isn't at all the first place I'd look to find the problem. Most Vista boxes don't ever crash. Mine certainly don't. On the server side of things (Windows Server versus RHEL, say) my impression is that Microsoft outcompetes Redhat on stability. Just not on cost.
        jacquesm 17y ago
        You should have checked my profile I guess before you made your claim ;) Anyway, a few dozen is pretty good, more than most people have. I figured you were owner of a large outfit that runs thousands of machines. That's when you start to get interesting statistics.
        thras 17y ago
        Hmm. I just have a lot of trouble believing that you run lots and lots of machines and yet have never seen a kernel crash.
imbaczek 17y ago
i don't get what the eff windows has to do with X server crashes taking down X apps? "Windows does it too" IS NOT an acceptable solution.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  True. But the point was that X doesn't do it in my experience, maybe I'm unique, maybe not you'll need more numbers. But the ONE windows box we have here has the same problem. So I could make the exact opposite case ("windows crashes, X does not, windows should learn from 'X'") and it would still just be anecdotal evidence. The author suggests that windows has 'the solution' for these kinds of crashes, that is why saying but windows does it too is relevant, it somewhat negates his assertion. If windows would really be rock solid I think I would have a different experience, and - sadly - I'm not alone in that. What the underlying reasons are is anybodies guess, but by bitching about it it is not going to get solved. His parting shot is: "I'm sure the blame-game will be played thoroughly in the comments, but it will only detract from the real problem here. The Linux desktop needs a modern, robust, and advanced graphics stack, which makes sure that crashes and bugs remain isolated, without them affecting the users' work. Microsoft has shown us how it's done, now all the X world needs to do is follow." Whereas if he would simply contact the maintainers of the code with a reproducible error and a stacktrace I'm sure they'd be happy to help.