shackleford posted:

Athas posted:

I never understood that response.

sb hermit posted:

that description of the sparc linux optimization under Linux is really fascinating, to be honest

quote:

Questions/Answers. This was, arguably, the most fun part of this talk. David came up with a number of questions that "opponents" of SPARCLinux typically throw at him, and then he responded to them. One of the questions he posted dealt with having a single kernel to support all of the various SPARC architectures (as opposed to the way that SunSoft has different kernel architectures requiring different kernels and different compiled routines). David's response: "Oh Really? Ask the users if they want to remember the difference [moving a kernel to a new architecture is not as simple as an rcp]. Besides, it is still faster than Solaris!"

My favorite question revolved around the scalability of SPARCLinux. David's response was that the more people who use it, the more people who will be interested in making it better and more scalable; thus the scalability issue will go away. His first answer, however, was my favorite: "bite me!"

shackleford posted:

presumably both of these nerds have chilled out a bit since their early 20's

Beeftweeter posted:

he's calling him a huge nerd

Athas posted:

They were both kernel programmers, so they were both nerds. One of them was just better at his job.

ryanrs posted:

but now with a ton of baggage, linux is still faster, yeah?

ryanrs posted:

but now with a ton of baggage, linux is still faster, yeah?

Athas posted:

They were both kernel programmers, so they were both nerds. One of them was just better at his job.

I remember reading that post when I was new to Linux, and not really understanding the technical details. I now understand them all and even think it's a very nice piece of technical writing. This is called personal growth.

eschaton posted:

I have it on good authority that Cantrill is pretty lovely and that response is just the tip of the iceberg

can’t say more (not my story to tell) but regardless of his technical chops, he’s persona non grata to some folks I know and trust

Athas posted:

They were both kernel programmers, so they were both nerds. One of them was just better at his job.

I remember reading that post when I was new to Linux, and not really understanding the technical details. I now understand them all and even think it's a very nice piece of technical writing. This is called personal growth.

FlapYoJacks posted:

Fedora 40 is out. Time to upgrade HBag!

Silver Alicorn posted:

I’m using kubuntu

ryanrs posted:

code:

 make[3] -C feeds/luci/protocols/luci-proto-ipv6 clean-build
 make[3] -C feeds/luci/protocols/luci-proto-ipv6 compile
 make[3] -C feeds/packages/libs/libpfring clean-build
 make[3] -C feeds/packages/libs/libpfring compile
    ERROR: package/feeds/packages/libpfring failed to build.
 make[3] -C package/network/utils/iw clean-build
 make[3] -C package/network/utils/iw compile
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 clean-build
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 compile
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 clean-build
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 compile
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 clean-build
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 compile
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 clean-build
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 compile
make -r world: build failed. Please re-run make with -j1 V=s or V=sc for a higher verbosity level to see what's going on
make: *** [/home/ryan/openwrt/include/toplevel.mk:232: world] Error 1

real	521m24.503s
user	2696m59.014s
sys	214m48.602s
ryan@rockpro64:~/openwrt$ 

Oof, I think I need a faster build machine. But it would have to be something free I can salvage from storage.

ryanrs posted:

code:

 make[3] -C feeds/luci/protocols/luci-proto-ipv6 clean-build
 make[3] -C feeds/luci/protocols/luci-proto-ipv6 compile
 make[3] -C feeds/packages/libs/libpfring clean-build
 make[3] -C feeds/packages/libs/libpfring compile
    ERROR: package/feeds/packages/libpfring failed to build.
 make[3] -C package/network/utils/iw clean-build
 make[3] -C package/network/utils/iw compile
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 clean-build
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 compile
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 clean-build
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 compile
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 clean-build
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 compile
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 clean-build
 make[3] -C package/boot/uboot-fritz4040 compile
make -r world: build failed. Please re-run make with -j1 V=s or V=sc for a higher verbosity level to see what's going on
make: *** [/home/ryan/openwrt/include/toplevel.mk:232: world] Error 1

real	521m24.503s
user	2696m59.014s
sys	214m48.602s
ryan@rockpro64:~/openwrt$ 

Oof, I think I need a faster build machine. But it would have to be something free I can salvage from storage.

sb hermit posted:

this is why when I usually develop code on my pi400, I either make small binaries or I use a scripting language like python, keeps the momentum going

FlapYoJacks posted:

That’s a build log for openwrt which builds an entire embedded Linux file system.

sb hermit posted:

anyways, any arm machine that doesn’t have like a superscalar architecture (like the apple m1 and successors, or other similarly powerful processors) will be absolute rear end in compilation by the way

ryanrs posted:

Yeah I can't unfuck this SoC's USB phy in python.

sb hermit posted:

“Please re-run make with -j1”

On the one hand, I can’t blame them, but on the other hand,

FlapYoJacks posted:

“make -j$(nproc) V=sc” works fine.

ryanrs posted:

code:

--- a/kernel/pf_ring.c
+++ b/kernel/pf_ring.c
@@ -5605,7 +5605,7 @@ static int packet_ring_bind(struct sock
 static int ring_bind(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *sa, int addr_len)
 {
   struct sock *sk = sock->sk;
-  char name[sizeof(sa->sa_data)+1];
+  char name[sizeof(sa->sa_data_min)+1];
 
   debug_printk(2, "ring_bind() called\n");
 
@@ -5617,7 +5617,7 @@ static int ring_bind(struct socket *sock
   if(sa->sa_family != PF_RING)
     return(-EINVAL);
 
-  memcpy(name, sa->sa_data, sizeof(sa->sa_data));
+  memcpy(name, sa->sa_data, sizeof(sa->sa_data_min));
 
   /* Add trailing zero if missing */
   name[sizeof(name)-1] = '\0';

lol I don't need compiler messages to fix this code

running make -j7 again

ryanrs posted:

code:

--- a/kernel/pf_ring.c
+++ b/kernel/pf_ring.c
@@ -5605,7 +5605,7 @@ static int packet_ring_bind(struct sock
 static int ring_bind(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *sa, int addr_len)
 {
   struct sock *sk = sock->sk;
-  char name[sizeof(sa->sa_data)+1];
+  char name[sizeof(sa->sa_data_min)+1];
 
   debug_printk(2, "ring_bind() called\n");
 
@@ -5617,7 +5617,7 @@ static int ring_bind(struct socket *sock
   if(sa->sa_family != PF_RING)
     return(-EINVAL);
 
-  memcpy(name, sa->sa_data, sizeof(sa->sa_data));
+  memcpy(name, sa->sa_data, sizeof(sa->sa_data_min));
 
   /* Add trailing zero if missing */
   name[sizeof(name)-1] = '\0';

lol I don't need compiler messages to fix this code

running make -j7 again