Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #242585 > unrolled thread
| Started by | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-05-08 16:18 +0000 |
| Last post | 2014-05-09 09:51 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 72 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-08 16:18 +0000
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-08 18:44 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-08 11:41 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-08 11:45 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-08 19:33 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-08 11:47 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-08 14:44 -0500
Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-08 16:42 -0400
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-08 22:45 +0200
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-08 13:49 -0700
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-08 13:46 -0700
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 02:26 +0000
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2014-05-09 02:38 +0000
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-09 05:52 -0400
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-09 07:37 -0400
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-09 06:56 -0500
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-08 19:39 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-05-08 23:25 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-08 23:20 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-08 19:53 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-09 07:34 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 09:18 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 02:39 +0000
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-08 19:50 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-08 14:46 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 02:21 +0000
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 02:24 +0000
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-08 23:20 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 10:35 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2014-05-09 11:08 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 09:38 +0000
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-09 06:51 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 14:19 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 08:59 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 13:34 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 08:58 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-09 08:03 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-09 08:45 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 10:09 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-09 06:49 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 13:52 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 09:30 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 15:33 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-09 07:55 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-09 08:17 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 10:51 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-09 07:24 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2014-05-09 13:33 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-09 10:06 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-09 09:21 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-09 09:46 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 09:28 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-09 09:09 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-09 15:20 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 10:40 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-16 11:50 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-16 11:52 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-16 12:59 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-16 07:31 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-16 06:46 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-16 12:59 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-16 18:15 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-16 12:39 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-16 16:44 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-16 13:01 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-16 18:46 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-16 13:10 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-16 16:46 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-16 16:53 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2014-05-09 04:38 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 13:40 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-09 09:51 -0400
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
| From | Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 13:52 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <87eh0341af.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #242728 |
Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> writes: > On 2014-05-09 03:20:08 +0000, DFS said: > >> On 5/8/2014 2:33 PM, Lusotec wrote: >> >>> Android *never* used a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" >> >> >> Where do you get your fantasies from? >> >> >> >> "the massive chore of completely integrating the code bases is not complete." >> >> http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/app-builder/linux-kernel-33-reunites-android-and-linuxs-mainline/1089 >> >> >> >> >> Also: http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/android-kernel-problems.html >> >> >> Also: "At LinuxCon, Torvalds explained, that “there's still a lot of merger to >> be done. ... but that eventually Android and Linux would come back to a common >> kernel, but it will probably not be for four to five years.” >> >> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/linus-torvalds-on-android-the-linux-fork/9426 >> > > I guess this means the Linux 'advocates' are again incorrect about their > favorite hobby OS... :) In this case DFS is wrong really. The Android kernel isnt far off. The user space on the other hand is not anything like any other conventional Linux based OS. -- "I have a BSEE.... Negative feedback has many benefits, but "maintaining stability" is not one of them. Just the opposite, in fact." The turdv/chrisv idiot and his pretend BSEE degree. PLEASE VISIT OUR HALL OF LINUX IDIOTS http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 09:30 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lkil9m$ieg$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #242729 |
On 5/9/2014 7:52 AM, Hadron wrote: > Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> writes: > >> On 2014-05-09 03:20:08 +0000, DFS said: >> >>> On 5/8/2014 2:33 PM, Lusotec wrote: >>> >>>> Android *never* used a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" >>> >>> >>> Where do you get your fantasies from? >>> >>> >>> >>> "the massive chore of completely integrating the code bases is not complete." >>> >>> http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/app-builder/linux-kernel-33-reunites-android-and-linuxs-mainline/1089 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Also: http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/android-kernel-problems.html >>> >>> >>> Also: "At LinuxCon, Torvalds explained, that “there's still a lot of merger to >>> be done. ... but that eventually Android and Linux would come back to a common >>> kernel, but it will probably not be for four to five years.” >>> >>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/linus-torvalds-on-android-the-linux-fork/9426 >>> >> >> I guess this means the Linux 'advocates' are again incorrect about their >> favorite hobby OS... :) > > In this case DFS is wrong really. The Android kernel isnt far off. I didn't say it /is/ far off. I said it /was/ far off. I posted the older links because Lusertec claimed they were never very different. He's wrong. > The user space on the other hand is not anything like any > other conventional Linux based OS.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 15:33 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <871tw33wmm.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #242751 |
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes: > On 5/9/2014 7:52 AM, Hadron wrote: >> Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> writes: >> >>> On 2014-05-09 03:20:08 +0000, DFS said: >>> >>>> On 5/8/2014 2:33 PM, Lusotec wrote: >>>> >>>>> Android *never* used a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" >>>> >>>> >>>> Where do you get your fantasies from? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "the massive chore of completely integrating the code bases is not complete." >>>> >>>> http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/app-builder/linux-kernel-33-reunites-android-and-linuxs-mainline/1089 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Also: http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/android-kernel-problems.html >>>> >>>> >>>> Also: "At LinuxCon, Torvalds explained, that “there's still a lot of merger to >>>> be done. ... but that eventually Android and Linux would come back to a common >>>> kernel, but it will probably not be for four to five years.” >>>> >>>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/linus-torvalds-on-android-the-linux-fork/9426 >>>> >>> >>> I guess this means the Linux 'advocates' are again incorrect about their >>> favorite hobby OS... :) >> >> In this case DFS is wrong really. The Android kernel isnt far off. > > I didn't say it /is/ far off. I said it /was/ far off. > > I posted the older links because Lusertec claimed they were never very > different. He's wrong. > >> The user space on the other hand is not anything like any >> other conventional Linux based OS. > > > > Noted. Correction : Lloyd. or Flatfish. Whoever you want him to be today.... ,---- | No matter how much you screech it, Android is the LInux who dares not speak the | name of its roots! And considering that all Android uses is a heavily modified | kernel, they could have just as well picked any other *nix kernel. | | -- | Lloyd `---- -- "I have a BSEE.... Negative feedback has many benefits, but "maintaining stability" is not one of them. Just the opposite, in fact." The turdv/chrisv idiot and his pretend BSEE degree. PLEASE VISIT OUR HALL OF LINUX IDIOTS http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 07:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ude1dh43ldxs.1mkynuoyv3ysi$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #242728 |
On Fri, 9 May 2014 06:49:51 -0500, Lloyd E Parsons wrote: > On 2014-05-09 03:20:08 +0000, DFS said: > >> On 5/8/2014 2:33 PM, Lusotec wrote: >> >>> Android *never* used a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" >> >> >> Where do you get your fantasies from? >> >> >> >> "the massive chore of completely integrating the code bases is not complete." >> >> http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/app-builder/linux-kernel-33-reunites-android-and-linuxs-mainline/1089 >> >> >> >> >> Also: http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/android-kernel-problems.html >> >> >> Also: "At LinuxCon, Torvalds explained, that “there's still a lot of >> merger to be done. ... but that eventually Android and Linux would come >> back to a common kernel, but it will probably not be for four to five >> years.” >> >> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/linus-torvalds-on-android-the-linux-fork/9426 >> > > I guess this means the Linux 'advocates' are again incorrect about > their favorite hobby OS... :) It's been proven many times that the Linux advocates know the least about their chosen OS. It's to be expected though as most of them use Windows or OSX to earn their living, their family uses Windows or OSX as well. The only time they are using Linux is when they are sitting in the basement posting to COLA.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 08:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <CF923F8C.36DDD%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #242730 |
On 5/9/14, 4:55 AM, in article ude1dh43ldxs.1mkynuoyv3ysi$.dlg@40tude.net, "flatfish+++" <phlatphish@yahoo.com> wrote: >> I guess this means the Linux 'advocates' are again incorrect about >> their favorite hobby OS... :) > > It's been proven many times that the Linux advocates know the least > about their chosen OS. My favorite is Peter - the list of his absurd claims always amuses me. > It's to be expected though as most of them use Windows or OSX to earn > their living, their family uses Windows or OSX as well. > > The only time they are using Linux is when they are sitting in the > basement posting to COLA. -- * Mint MATE: Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint / LibreOffice: <http://youtu.be/USU9iqppfto> * Win 8 / Word 2013: <http://youtu.be/z8gUL2TCcV4> * Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 10:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2c06de9a-628f-400a-9461-7eb0ebd89db3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #242781 |
On Friday, May 9, 2014 3:17:16 PM UTC, Snit wrote: > On 5/9/14, 4:55 AM, in article ude1dh43ldxs.1mkynuoyv3ysi$.dlg@40tude.net, > > "flatfish+++" <phlatphish@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > >> I guess this means the Linux 'advocates' are again incorrect about > > >> their favorite hobby OS... :) > > > > > > It's been proven many times that the Linux advocates know the least > > > about their chosen OS. > > > > My favorite is Peter - the list of his absurd claims always amuses me. My favorite is the list of quotes about you. How many people have you convinced to hate you? > > > It's to be expected though as most of them use Windows or OSX to earn > > > their living, their family uses Windows or OSX as well. > > > > > > The only time they are using Linux is when they are sitting in the > > > basement posting to COLA. > > > > > > > > -- > > * Mint MATE: Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> > > * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> > > * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> > > * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> > > * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> > > * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> > > * Mint / LibreOffice: <http://youtu.be/USU9iqppfto> > > * Win 8 / Word 2013: <http://youtu.be/z8gUL2TCcV4> > > * Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> Another forum ruined by Michael Glasser Prescott Computer Guy of Prescott, Arizona 86301 http://prescottcomputerguy.com The best web design in Prescott, AZ is shown at his website http://prescottcomputerguy.com/web-design.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 07:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <25ipm999h6ksuqmb375ksb0t5dunddkv5s@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #242728 |
Lloyd E Parsons wrote: >I guess this means the Linux 'advocates' are again incorrect about >their favorite hobby OS... :) I guess this means that crApple fanboys accept 3-year-old articles as evidence of how things are today. -- 'According to "advocate facts" Apple is struggling and taking a beating because of Android.' - trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 13:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1iuu3b-4q4.ln1@myhost.linuxnetworkbeta.net> |
| In reply to | #242736 |
chrisv wrote: > Lloyd E Parsons wrote: > >>I guess this means the Linux 'advocates' are again incorrect about >>their favorite hobby OS... :) > > I guess this means that crApple fanboys accept 3-year-old articles as > evidence of how things are today. Well it seems the crApple fanboys accept anything, especially if it's got an "i" infront. -- So much for Windwoes AV: "Antivirus products were developed to keep hackers out, but in today’s world, Symantec only keeps about 45 percent of attempted breaches from ever making it inside." http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1113140089/antivirus-software-dead-technology-brian-dye-symantec-050714/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 10:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lkincq$26a$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #242736 |
chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > Lloyd E Parsons wrote: > >>I guess this means the Linux 'advocates' are again incorrect about >>their favorite hobby OS... :) > > I guess this means that crApple fanboys accept 3-year-old articles as > evidence of how things are today. Well, Luso did use the word "never". Although, as even "Hadron" noted, one could quibble about the word "heavily". -- "What the scientists have in their briefcases is terrifying." -- Nikita Khrushchev
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 09:21 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <bt46j4Fim8aU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #242759 |
On 2014-05-09 14:06:18 +0000, Chris Ahlstrom said: > chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> Lloyd E Parsons wrote: >> >>> I guess this means the Linux 'advocates' are again incorrect about >>> their favorite hobby OS... :) >> >> I guess this means that crApple fanboys accept 3-year-old articles as >> evidence of how things are today. > > Well, Luso did use the word "never". Although, as even "Hadron" noted, > one could quibble about the word "heavily". Well advocacy is all about quibbling and hyperbole!! :) Not to mention a few nits to get picked... -- Lloyd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 09:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <peqpm9hkam6ra567vav19n95oaiap522sl@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #242767 |
Lloyd E Parsons wrote: >> Well, Luso did use the word "never". Although, as even "Hadron" noted, >> one could quibble about the word "heavily". > >Well advocacy is all about quibbling and hyperbole!! Substitute 'trolling' for 'advocacy' and you are pretty much on the mark. All so that a group of decent, honest, and reasonable people can be attacked. -- "It's all nice and wonderful if a Linux or Android company (Google, Samsung, etc) makes a large profit. But if someone else makes a larger profit then that company is evil and greedy." - trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel", lying shamelessly
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 09:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lkil5n$ieg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #242728 |
On 5/9/2014 7:49 AM, Lloyd E Parsons wrote: > On 2014-05-09 03:20:08 +0000, DFS said: > >> On 5/8/2014 2:33 PM, Lusotec wrote: >> >>> Android *never* used a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" >> >> >> Where do you get your fantasies from? >> >> >> >> "the massive chore of completely integrating the code bases is not >> complete." >> >> http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/app-builder/linux-kernel-33-reunites-android-and-linuxs-mainline/1089 >> >> >> >> >> Also: http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/android-kernel-problems.html >> >> >> Also: "At LinuxCon, Torvalds explained, that “there's still a lot of >> merger to be done. ... but that eventually Android and Linux would >> come back to a common kernel, but it will probably not be for four to >> five years.” >> >> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/linus-torvalds-on-android-the-linux-fork/9426 >> > > I guess this means the Linux 'advocates' are again incorrect about their > favorite hobby OS... :) It means they're closer than before to being able to call Android a "Linux distribution" - which it's not, of course. A real Linux distro is a collection of GPL code. Android is Apache code, so the device vendors can make their own changes and distribute them and don't have to provide the source.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 09:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lkik23$974$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #242704 |
On 14-05-08 11:20 PM, DFS wrote: > On 5/8/2014 2:33 PM, Lusotec wrote: > >> Android *never* used a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" > > > Where do you get your fantasies from? > > > > "the massive chore of completely integrating the code bases is not > complete." > > http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/app-builder/linux-kernel-33-reunites-android-and-linuxs-mainline/1089 > > > > > Also: http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/android-kernel-problems.html > > > Also: "At LinuxCon, Torvalds explained, that “there's still a lot of > merger to be done. ... but that eventually Android and Linux would come > back to a common kernel, but it will probably not be for four to five > years.” > > http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/linus-torvalds-on-android-the-linux-fork/9426 Wow, good post. -- Silver Slimer Wikipedia & OpenMedia Supporter
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 15:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <lkio76$8pp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #242704 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 DFS wrote: > Lusotec wrote: >> Android *never* used a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" > > Where do you get your fantasies from? It is called reality! You and Lloyd may want to do some fact checks before posting. > "the massive chore of completely integrating the code bases is not > complete." > > http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/app-builder/linux-kernel-33-reunites- > android-and-linuxs-mainline/1089 No support in the quote for a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" noted! > Also: http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/android-kernel-problems.html > > Also: "At LinuxCon, Torvalds explained, that “there's still a lot of > merger to be done. ... but that eventually Android and Linux would come > back to a common kernel, but it will probably not be for four to five > years.” > > http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/linus-torvalds-on-android-the-linux- > fork/9426 Again, no support in the quote for a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" noted! Android's Linux and main tree Linux principal differences were mainly wakelock, earlysuspend, Android security model, another frame buffer and drivers. None of these involved heavy modifications to Linux. All these were additions to Linux that did not replace, remove or significantly change any of the existing code. They introduced some duplication with existing features and that was one of the problem raised by the Linux maintainers. Several of the Android features were applied to Linux but due to poor maintenance/interest from Google were later removed. If Linux was "heavily modified" by these patches then it would be very unlikely that the patches would have been merged in the first place and later removed. Regards -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlNs5CUACgkQGQjO2ccW76p/gAD/W1eoy0yVwhAm3Tar66znGhFo fg4RzJ+Mg/g49TH66IEA/j6w0x2jPi9cHcz4Wyw8zJKbIGeeDetdfKTfX/vuf556 =ukdG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 10:40 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lkipd4$hha$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #242765 |
On 5/9/2014 10:20 AM, Lusotec wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > DFS wrote: >> Lusotec wrote: >>> Android *never* used a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" >> >> Where do you get your fantasies from? > > It is called reality! You and Lloyd may want to do some fact checks before > posting. >> "the massive chore of completely integrating the code bases is not >> complete." >> >> http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/app-builder/linux-kernel-33-reunites- >> android-and-linuxs-mainline/1089 > > No support in the quote for a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" noted! Because 'massive chore to integrate' means lightly modified? >> Also: http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/android-kernel-problems.html >> >> Also: "At LinuxCon, Torvalds explained, that “there's still a lot of >> merger to be done. ... but that eventually Android and Linux would come >> back to a common kernel, but it will probably not be for four to five >> years.” >> >> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/linus-torvalds-on-android-the-linux- >> fork/9426 > > Again, no support in the quote for a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" > noted! Because 'a lot of merger to be done' and 'eventually...four or five years away' means lightly modified? > Android's Linux and main tree Linux principal differences were mainly > wakelock, earlysuspend, Android security model, another frame buffer and > drivers. None of these involved heavy modifications to Linux. ha! You and the rest of the world - including serious kernel hackers Kroah-Hartman and Torvalds - have different interpretations of 'heavily modified'. I'm sensing you're another IT Sooperman. Did you merge the Android and mainline kernels over a sunny weekend out by the pool while sipping margaritas? > All these were > additions to Linux that did not replace, remove or significantly change any > of the existing code. They introduced some duplication with existing > features and that was one of the problem raised by the Linux maintainers. > > Several of the Android features were applied to Linux but due to poor > maintenance/interest from Google were later removed. If Linux was "heavily > modified" by these patches then it would be very unlikely that the patches > would have been merged in the first place and later removed. > > Regards Have a nice day! (that's what we say here in the States)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-16 11:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ll4qi2$qgd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #242770 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 DFS wrote: > Lusotec wrote: >> DFS wrote: >>> Lusotec wrote: >>>> Android *never* used a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" >>> >>> Where do you get your fantasies from? >> >> It is called reality! You and Lloyd may want to do some fact checks >> before posting. >> >>> "the massive chore of completely integrating the code bases is not >>> complete." >>> >>> http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/app-builder/linux-kernel-33-reunites- >>> android-and-linuxs-mainline/1089 >> >> No support in the quote for a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" noted! > > Because 'massive chore to integrate' means lightly modified? No, and it doesn't mean "heavily modified" either! >>> Also: http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/android-kernel-problems.html > >> >>> Also: "At LinuxCon, Torvalds explained, that “there's still a lot of >>> merger to be done. ... but that eventually Android and Linux would come >>> back to a common kernel, but it will probably not be for four to five >>> years.” >>> >>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/linus-torvalds-on-android-the- linux- >>> fork/9426 >> >> Again, no support in the quote for a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" >> noted! > > Because 'a lot of merger to be done' and 'eventually...four or five > years away' means lightly modified? No, and it doesn't mean "heavily modified" either! >> Android's Linux and main tree Linux principal differences were mainly >> wakelock, earlysuspend, Android security model, another frame buffer and >> drivers. None of these involved heavy modifications to Linux. > > ha! You and the rest of the world - including serious kernel hackers > Kroah-Hartman and Torvalds - have different interpretations of 'heavily > modified'. You are the one claiming they consider it 'heavily modified' but they did not use such words. Being a "massive chore to integrate" or a "a lot of merger to be done" is not equivalent to "heavily modified". > I'm sensing you're another IT Sooperman. Did you merge the Android and > mainline kernels over a sunny weekend out by the pool while sipping > margaritas? I'm not a "IT Sooperman" but I at least know a bit of what I'm talking about. But you and Lloyd don't have to believe me or anyone else. You can simply look at the kernels and see for yourselves. Like I'm doing bellow. Select a Android kernel version and compare it to the equivalent main tree Linux version. Then select two consecutive main tree Linux versions and compare those. Then compare the comparisons and see if you consider the Android Linux version a heavily modified version of the main tree Linux version. For the Android Linux to main tree Linux I selected the oldest Android kernel, 2.6.39, that was release before anything from the Android project was committed to the main tree Linux. I'm assuming this version has the largest difference to the main tree Linux but you can prove me wrong by making the comparison for other version(s). I selected the most recent two consecutive version of main tree Linux, 3.13 and 3.14. Here are the links for the versions I used, with the corresponding dates. https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/common/+archive/android-2.6.39.tar.gz (Mon Sep 10 12:57:30 2012 -0700) https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/linux-2.6.39.tar.xz (19-May-2011 04:21) https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/linux-3.13.tar.xz (20-Jan-2014 02:59) https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/linux-3.14.tar.xz (14-Apr-2014 18:44) I extract these tar ball and run the following commands to make the comparisons. $ diff --minimal --recursive --ignore-all-space --unified linux-2.6.39 \ linux-android-2.6.39 | diffstat | tail -n1 579 files changed, 6850 insertions(+), 1988 deletions(-) $ diff --minimal --recursive --ignore-all-space --unified linux-3.13 \ linux-3.14 | diffstat | tail -n1 9074 files changed, 229934 insertions(+), 157688 deletions(-) For curiosity, lets remove the drivers tree and see what that changes. $ rm -Rf linux-2.6.39/drivers linux-android-2.6.39/drivers \ linux-3.13/drivers linux-3.14/drivers $ diff --minimal --recursive --ignore-all-space --unified linux-2.6.39 \ linux-android-2.6.39 | diffstat | tail -n1 326 files changed, 3927 insertions(+), 1128 deletions(-) $ diff --minimal --recursive --ignore-all-space --unified linux-3.13 \ linux-3.14 | diffstat | tail -n1 4546 files changed, 107554 insertions(+), 69067 deletions(-) Excluding the drivers, the number are almost halved but the general picture stays mostly the same. - From the above numbers it is easy to see that the differences for Android Linux 2.6.39 to main tree Linux 2.6.39 is many times smaller than the differences for two consecutive main tree Linux versions, 3.13 and 3.14. If the differences of two consecutive main tree Linux versions (3 months apart) is many times larger than the differences of a Android version to main tree Linux version then I don't see how the Android Linux version can be "heavily modified", unless one considers two consecutive version of Linux to be "heavily modified" times 30! >> All these were >> additions to Linux that did not replace, remove or significantly change >> any of the existing code. They introduced some duplication with existing >> features and that was one of the problem raised by the Linux maintainers. >> >> Several of the Android features were applied to Linux but due to poor >> maintenance/interest from Google were later removed. If Linux was >> "heavily modified" by these patches then it would be very unlikely that >> the patches would have been merged in the first place and later removed. >> >> Regards > > Have a nice day! > > (that's what we say here in the States) And a nice saying it is! :) Have a nice day! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlN17YAACgkQGQjO2ccW76qxxQD8D2iJkJMvQMKK7FFLWRQ7y2Mz 2nBI6GUHEZ2zZDc8BjkA/jFchFTnVICYYTpJbvI7GTWhYVuVVsWPHXcKMBSRB60g =UxBS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-16 11:52 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ll4qm7$qgd$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #243972 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Lusotec wrote: > Like I'm doing bellow. bellow => below! Regards -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlN17gcACgkQGQjO2ccW76oApQD9FUD1O45UFFjhY1GPA748yZFE PFMGXFhGk5BBoFM+buQA/jJrMGCzyxJ62HopKGEfV2rEeouufx68XcXAIo+a+w88 =+gdT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-16 12:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ll5g63$ha2$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #243973 |
On 5/16/2014 6:52 AM, Lusotec wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > Lusotec wrote: >> Like I'm doing bellow. > > bellow => below! bellow = chrisv below = Marti > Regards > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) > > iF4EAREIAAYFAlN17gcACgkQGQjO2ccW76oApQD9FUD1O45UFFjhY1GPA748yZFE > PFMGXFhGk5BBoFM+buQA/jJrMGCzyxJ62HopKGEfV2rEeouufx68XcXAIo+a+w88 > =+gdT > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-16 07:31 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ll4stm$5ad$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #243972 |
Lusotec wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > DFS wrote: >>> >>>> "the massive chore of completely integrating the code bases is not >>>> complete." >>>> >>>> http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/app-builder/linux-kernel-33-reunites- >>>> android-and-linuxs-mainline/1089 >>> >>> No support in the quote for a "heavily modified [Linux] kernel" noted! >> >> Because 'massive chore to integrate' means lightly modified? > > No, and it doesn't mean "heavily modified" either! > > <snip> > > Select a Android kernel version and compare it to the equivalent main tree > Linux version. Then select two consecutive main tree Linux versions and > compare those. Then compare the comparisons and see if you consider the > Android Linux version a heavily modified version of the main tree Linux > version. > > For the Android Linux to main tree Linux I selected the oldest Android > kernel, 2.6.39, that was release before anything from the Android project > was committed to the main tree Linux. I'm assuming this version has the > largest difference to the main tree Linux but you can prove me wrong by > making the comparison for other version(s). I selected the most recent two > consecutive version of main tree Linux, 3.13 and 3.14. I snipped the details. I simply wanted to note how DFS argues (via "quotes") versus how Lusotec argues (via concrete demonstration). And anybody who peruses the linux.kernel newsgroup every day will see dozens of changes in the Linux kernel every day. I suppose DFS will also consider Microsoft's efforts to integrate hyper-V support into Linux a "massive chore" (just like the "media" did), when a large part of the work was simply Microsoft cleaning up after themselves. -- It is the theory which decides what can be observed. -- Albert Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-16 06:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <84ubn99h486iroku6sdgpuien9hct29tt7@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #243974 |
Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > Lusotec wrote: >> >> Dumfsck wrote: >>> >>> Because 'massive chore to integrate' means lightly modified? >> >> No, and it doesn't mean "heavily modified" either! > >I snipped the details. I simply wanted to note how DFS argues (via >"quotes") versus how Lusotec argues (via concrete demonstration). The dumfscking troll seems to think that integration and modification are the same thing. Somehow, the advocate, the guy who actually knows WTF he's talking about, just *must* be wrong, you know. It simply *cannot* be admitted that the advocate is reasonable and correct. >I suppose DFS will also consider Microsoft's efforts to integrate hyper-V >support into Linux a "massive chore" (just like the "media" did), when a >large part of the work was simply Microsoft cleaning up after themselves. Oh, yes. As I recall, the advocates were "hypocrites" for not praising the Evil Empire for their (completely self-serving) "contributions" to Linux. (rolling eyes) -- "Then another day software patents are bad and advocates refuse to acknowledge them while at the same time Redhat is building up their patent portfolio." - trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web