tl;dr

linux still sucks

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 01:49:22PM +0200, Tobias Ulmer wrote:
> tl;dr: In my opinion, these anti Linux rants do harm to OpenBSD by
> condemning everything Linux does instead of allowing us to pick out just
> the good parts.
> 
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:22:02AM +0200, Benny Lofgren wrote:
> > On 2011-06-22 09.24, Tobias Ulmer wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 03:48:59AM +0200, Benny Lofgren wrote:
> > >> On 2011-06-22 03.03, vadi...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>> Please continue to use Linux.
> > >>>> That's ugly, useless and dangerous.
> > >>>
> > >>> Oops, looks like that was a "holy war" type of question. Sorry I did
> > >>> not want to start that.
> > >>>
> > >>>> If you want Linux, use Linux.
> > >>>
> > >>> It's not that I want specifically Linux. I've just decided to look for
> > >>> a system that cat satisfy me from the usability point of view. I do
> > >>> not care if that will be Linux or *BSD or Solaris or whatever  else.
> > >>> The main idea was that the work with the system should be a pleasure,
> > >>> not a pain :)
> > >>
> > >> What you should do is relearn the proper way. :-)
> > >>
> > 
> > [the rest of my rant deleted]
> > 
> > > Oh please, Linus wrote the kernel, not Ubuntu. If you hate coreutils or
> > > getopt, blame the respective groups that developed them and not someone
> > > writing a kernel, a long time ago.
> > 
> > No, I don't hate coreutils or getopt, getopt is good shit. What I hate
> > is the inconsistensies, the fact that Linux isn't a homogenous piece of
> > work but so obviously a product of a thousand chefs, few with similar
> > taste.
> > 
> > And my criticism extends to the kernel too, or rather begins with it, so
> > it definitley applies to Linus himself and the kernel guys.
> > 
> > > This rose tinted "OpenBSD is the greatest" shit really gets on my
> > > nerves. It's all fun to bash others, but from time to time you have to
> > > look at their stuff and figure out which parts they did right and you
> > > could improve.
> > 
> > Granted, my rant was, on purpose, negatively Linux-biased, but not in
> > one single place - also on purpose - would you have found the word
> > OpenBSD or any slant towards it, which makes me suspect you couldn't
> > stand what I wrote long enough to actually read all of it. :-)
> 
> Right. And I felt in the mood to take the opposite position for the fun
> of it.
> 
> > 
> > So I think you might have missed my point. There is a "true unix"
> > heritage that needs to be cared for, THAT MAKES LIFE SIMPLER if you
> > understand and take advantage of it.
> 
> OpenBSD specifically and old BSD in general is not true to Unix. From
> ksh to billions of options to find and other tools to the entire
> networking framework (bolted on with additional syscalls, pseudo devices
> etc), nothing of that is Unix (or even -like).
> 
> Here is something to read: http://harmful.cat-v.org/cat-v/
> 
> BSD went through a similar phase as GNU: adding every feature known to
> man to the original Unix commands. Have a look at lpr(1) for GNUism in
> action. After some time we got a little wiser and stopped adding flags
> for everything that was convenient.
> 
> Linux, especially with the constant influx of new developers and
> commercial interests, hasn't yet cooled down enough to stop messing
> around with their "base" system.
> 
> However if I got my history right, the improvements of BSD are why people
> bought a Unix license and then installed BSD. It was better, it had more
> features, networking, usable error messages, better language support
> etc. etc.
> 
> > Linus missed or chose to ignore that part entirely. That's fine, as
> > Linux is not said to be a unix operating system, but a "unix like" one.
> > 
> > The problem is, this "likeness" is not "like enough", so it really
> > doesn't help the community overall but rather hinders it. This is
> > something the Linux and GNU folks could have addressed in the early
> > days but either chose to ignore or were ignorant about. For that
> > they absolutely deserve some blame.
> 
> Are you ready to test my patch where I'm going to remove -exec from
> find(1) so you can have your real Unix back? And -r from grep? And...
> 
> Bullshit, you use BSD because just like Linux, it added lots of handy
> features while keeping it simple. Linux may overdo it from your and my
> point of view, but so does OpenBSD from the POV of some old unix guys.
> 
> > 
> > Now, the OP:s questions are certainly addressable by choosing a shell
> > he is used to, and perhaps by a set of aliases and/or scripts to tune
> > the "user experience" into something familiar for him.
> 
> The getopt(3) function is inconsistent amongst operating systems and
> could use some polish in my opinion. Maybe there are technical reasons
> why this feature can't be implemented, but this discussion has certainly
> extinguished my curiosity about it.
> 
> Backwards threads like this one prevent people from trying to improve
> things, which is the real damage done.
> 
> Once they get "discussed" in this manner on misc@, it's  difficult to
> get even very sensible patches committed. Some developers may have
> formed a strong "anti" stance and it takes years to convince them.
> 
> > 
> > My problem with that, and the reason for the recommendation I made
> > before digressing into rant mode, is that that practice will get him
> > into trouble in the long run, as he encounters other flavors of unix,
> > linux, Solaris, *BSD and whatever else might lie in his path in the
> > future. So my suggestion, while tongue in cheek, was made in all
> > seriousness and is in my opinion still a very valid one.
> 
> I'm not specifically interested in the thread starters problem, it's
> reasonable to suggest more portable approaches. What got me was the
> (imo) baseless anti Linux (and Linus) sentiment.
> 
> I love good rants, but every now and then... Anyway, here's my novel,
> now I have work to do.
> 
> > 
> > (Ok, this will be my last novel in this thread, I promise... I just
> > seem genetically unable to say things in just a few words.)
> > 
> > 
> > Regards,
> > /Benny
> > 
> > -- 
> > internetlabbet.se     / work:   +46 8 551 124 80      / "Words must
> > Benny Lvfgren        /  mobile: +46 70 718 11 90     /   be weighed,
> >                     /   fax:    +46 8 551 124 89    /    not counted."
> >                    /    email:  benny -at- internetlabbet.se

Reply via email to