Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #378675
| From | Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( |
| Date | 2016-10-31 18:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <e7pfeuFm6f1U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (7 earlier) <nv7gd0$pk2$2@dont-email.me> <e7p0nhFi8psU3@mid.individual.net> <nv7rga$43f$1@dont-email.me> <e7pb76Fkv6fU2@mid.individual.net> <nv80so$kjm$9@dont-email.me> |
On 2016-10-31, GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: > On 10/31/16 10:52, Jim Polaski wrote: >> On 2016-10-31, Silver Slimer<> wrote: >>> On 2016-10-31 9:53 AM, Jim Polaski wrote: >>>> On 2016-10-31, Silver Slimer<> wrote: >>>>> On 2016-10-30 8:15 PM, Jim Polaski wrote: >>>>>> On 2016-10-30, Melzzzzz<mel@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Sun, 30 Oct 2016 18:58:34 -0400 >>>>>>> Chris Ahlstrom<OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Melzzzzz wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 30 Oct 2016 20:50:12 GMT >>>>>>>>> Jim Polaski<jpolaski@linuxmail.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 2016-10-30, Melzzzzz<mel@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 30 Oct 2016 11:24:32 +0000 (UTC) >>>>>>>>>>> Melzzzzz<Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have tried kernel 4.8.5 in orther to switch from trusty 4.7, >>>>>>>>>>>> but alas got BUG softlockup on CPU(s) during rsync. Have to >>>>>>>>>>>> hard reset, switched back to 4.7... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hm, it seems that it is zfs bug after all. Just had messages >>>>>>>>>>> regarding zfs on 4.7 ;( >>>>>>>>>>> Returned to 4.8 to test further, but it seems kernel is ok as I >>>>>>>>>>> had problems with rsync from zfs on 4.7 either.... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sometimes I think you Linux dweebs would be bored if Linux >>>>>>>>>> actually worked. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It does work. I use it for about 90% of my computing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> He simply neglects that I run bleeding edge everything, so problems are >>>>>>> expected ... I think I have found culprit. It's if i ran two instances >>>>>>> of rsync bug happens. And it is zfs related... >>>>>> >>>>>> So then you can't be using Linux for anything important. >>>>>> Unless tinkering with Linux is important to you. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Constant fun flatfish! ;) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> He should go somewhere else and promote Windows. Or maybe help >>>>>>>> out the Gates Foundation. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> He promotes Window alright ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> People can choose to use Linux if they desire to. >>>>>> They don't. >>>>>> The reason is Linux sucks as a desktop system and all the lying and half >>>>>> truths told by the Linux herd can't change that. >>>>>> >>>>>> When something given away for free is shunned by some 99 percent of >>>>>> computer users it's time to reevaluate that product and make changes in >>>>>> order to make the product more appealing to the market. >>>>>> It will never happen though. Linux will continue to fragment, cause >>>>>> division of the users (can you say systemd?) and so forth. >>>>> >>>>> Use GTK or use QT? Use Mir or use Wayland? It never ends with the >>>>> controversies in the Linux camp. >>>> >>>> Th infighting is harming Linux as a whole. If anything it makes the >>>> Linux users and developers look like spoiled babies. >>>> And they are. >>> >>> The "advocates" will tell you that it doesn't matter whether you prefer >>> QT or GTK as the programs of one will work in the environment of the >>> other as long as the dependencies are installed. Those dependencies, >>> however, don't prevent programs from one library from looking completely >>> off in the environment of the other. These programs usually ignore >>> personalization choices and any other settings your system might have. >>> As or Wayland vs. Mir, this is a situation where both camps would >>> clearly have benefited from working together rather than competing for >>> what is essentially the same thing. If they had, we'd have a finished >>> product instead of two shoddy, unstable and unfinished ones. >> >> Exactly. >> Linux does a lot of different things. >> The problem is it doesn't do them well. >> Linux has 15 crappy, inconsistent DE vs one quality, consistent DE like >> OSX or Windows. >> >> >>>>>> And with complete idiots like Chris Ahlstrom, William Poaster, 7, chrisv >>>>>> and many others like them "advocating" Linux, Microsoft has nothing to >>>>>> worry about. >>>>> >>>>> At the very least, Linux will appear to be the choice of closet >>>>> homosexuals, transsexuals and idiots. >>>> >>>> Someone should create a Linux distribution for sexually confused Linux >>>> users and call it : >>>> >>>> "TrannyLinux" >>>> >>>> Or "TransLix". >>> >>> You seem to be suggesting that there is such a thing as a Linux user who >>> _isn't_ sexually confused. >> >> Better yet! >> The distribution will be at the top of Distrowatch in no time! >> >> >>>>>> For Microsoft it's like a war against 5 different armys where one has >>>>>> the guns, another has the bullets, another has the maps, another the >>>>>> petrol and the last has the trucks to transport the troops. The problem >>>>>> is none of the armys talk to each other. >>>>>> That's Linux. >>>>> >>>>> Like the Soviet army during the Second World War. >>>> >>>> Yes. >>>> >>>>>> And that's why Linux has been stagnating as a desktop system since the >>>>>> day it was born. >>>>> >>>>> To be fair, it's improved but it's still a gigantic distance from where >>>>> it should be. >>>> >>>> Sure Linux has improved. It's where Windows XP's last version was about >>>> 10 years ago. >>>> And that's a maybe. >>> >>> Mind you, XP was ridiculously stable AND fast which is one of the many >>> reasons people still hold onto it to this day. Linux is not stable >>> though it is very fast if you choose the right desktop environment. So >>> it still doesn't compare too well to Windows XP. >> >> And then there is that pesky topic of applications. >> > > There is one thing I noticed about OS X... they have violated their own > GUI guidlines. In TextEdit, there used to be "Save As...", but it is > now gone in El Capitan. Now there is just "Save". So how does one save > an Untitled file with a new name? You have to use the menu item Move. > Really dumb one. > Apple is realling going down the drain these days. Look at the prices on their recent MBP models. Way overpriced for the power you are getting.
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 11:24 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-10-30 06:14 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-10-30 09:39 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-10-30 06:50 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-10-30 06:54 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 14:12 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 10:30 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 14:40 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 12:49 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 18:41 +0000
You are not fooling anyone, Mr. Maggot. John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-10-30 15:21 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 10:27 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 09:49 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-10-30 13:49 +0000
Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-10-30 06:57 -0700
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 14:11 +0000
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 15:35 +0100
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-10-30 10:38 -0400
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 14:45 +0000
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 12:50 -0400
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 18:42 +0000
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 17:31 -0400
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-11-01 10:58 -0700
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-10-30 16:11 +0000
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 19:46 +0000
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-10-30 16:04 -0400
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-10-30 20:52 +0000
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 21:54 +0100
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-30 22:42 +0100
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-10-31 18:08 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 15:33 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 12:47 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 18:38 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-10-30 10:14 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 14:24 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-10-30 10:26 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-31 07:32 -0500
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 12:59 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 15:26 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 14:31 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-10-30 16:09 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 21:47 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 20:50 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 22:06 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 21:09 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-10-30 18:58 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-31 00:51 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 00:15 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-31 09:19 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 13:53 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-31 12:29 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 16:52 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-10-31 12:01 -0600
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 18:05 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-31 18:12 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-10-31 15:08 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-10-31 19:27 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 23:44 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-10-31 20:25 -0600
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-10-31 22:43 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-11-01 17:17 -0600
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-11-01 19:21 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-11-01 16:46 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-11-01 17:33 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-11-02 08:05 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-10-31 20:24 -0600
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( fr314159@gmail.com - 2016-10-31 06:22 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-31 13:29 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-10-31 12:02 -0600
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-31 18:10 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-31 19:46 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-31 18:58 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-31 21:25 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-11-01 03:49 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 13:54 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-10-31 12:02 -0600
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-31 01:10 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-10-31 10:50 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-11-01 12:56 -0400
csiph-web