Letters to the editor

Slight correction for LWN 5 December 2002

Hi guys,

	I'm way behind in reading LWN, but I came across this from two
weeks ago:

> Then, there is the little problem that module parameters do not
> work. Rusty Russell has been working on this issue for a while, and
> has produced several sets of patches, none of which have been merged
> as of this writing.

That's not really true: I've been working on the userspace tools
mainly.  The parameter patch (surely a core part of module
functionality!) was submitted with the original module rewrite, and
supported even for the very first release of the new userspace
utilities.

The patch was retransmitted several times before Linus asked for a
namechange of the new "unified" parameters (on which the old-style
MODULE_PARM macros are rebuilt).  Then it was retransmitted several
times more (there were two trivial fixes along the way).  It finally
went in just before 2.5.52 was released.

Why did it take so long?  The most likely reason, I think, is simply
that Linus doesn't use modules.

I would like to thank those who *have* reported bugs to me, most of
which were trivial and easily fixed (or already fixed, and pending
inclusion by Linus).

Hope that clarifies!
Rusty.
--
  Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.

Comments (none posted)

CAAST and FLOSS - Acronym Wars

Quoting Jackie Famulak, board member of
  Canadian Alliance Against Software Theft (CAAST):
> "First, a large percentage of free, open source software out there
> is Linux-based; it's not products such as a photo management
> software suites," Famulak says.

At last count, there were several score FLOSS (Free/Libre Open Source 
Software) photo management packages available for Linux, such as:

    http://www.easysw.com/~mike/flphoto/ (local application)

    http://photomanager.sourceforge.net/ (web-enabled application)

So, yes, Linux users can and do run photo management software (my 30yo 
mother-of-four sister-in-law is an avid digital photographer and likes to use 
Kuickshow for this on her Mandrake Linux system).

> "If you look at the users of software, there's not a lot of people out
> there that are ready to begin programming their own software.

You don't have to. Enormous amounts have already been developed, and most 
Linux distributions come with hundreds to thousands of packages. See these 
sites for examples of the many available packages:

    http://freshmeat.net/ (lists 26,000 packages)

    http://sal.kachinatech.com/ (lists 3,000 scientific packages)

    http://www.sourceforge.net/ (hosts 53,000 packages)

> Companies don't always have the resources (to develop software)

They don't need to. Firstly, as mentioned, it's already provided; secondly, 
it's simple to outsource. In fact, with many projects you can just ask nicely 
for this or that feature and it gets added, free of charge.

Mandrake did this with their Linux distribution for me, and the developers of 
the sysmond monitoring daemon did likewise (so I reciprocated by adding more 
features for them).

On the other hand, companies using the software produced by CAAST members 
don't have that option, in most cases can't even see the workings of the 
software, to know for themselves how it does what it does.

When was the last time Microsoft added a feature to MS-Office, or AutoDesk 
added something to AutoCAD for you? At any cost?

> they can't afford the downtime or provide the necessary support that a
> manufacturer can give them 24/7.

They generally have considerably less downtime, because FLOSS and the 
platforms it runs on are often considerably more reliable than those supplied 
by your members.

They automatically have assurance (which CAAST members do not offer them) that 
should the supplier go bust, elect to discontinue a product, or begin 
attaching unacceptable conditions to the continued use of the product, they 
can reasonably expect to continue using and developing from the existing 
product.

They also have a substantial, worldwide, polylingual, cross-timezone support 
base which doesn't cost them an arm and a leg, and is often personally 
interested (not just interested in a detached, corporate sense linked to a 
bottom line) in seeing their problems resolved.

> When you consider it in that regard, we already are providing a service."

No, you are not. You are occupying a place which could be better occupied by a 
body not limited representing such a narrow range of interests, one which 
truly provides a service to Canadians, not just a service to its own members.

This tactic is called "dog in a manger" and I do wish you'd stop talking down 
products and services which you clearly do not even understand.

FLOSS is not some two-bit operation. Saudi Aramco uses Linux to search for 
oil, Google runs on Linux, the European Union is about to settle on the 
OpenOffice.org file format as a document interchange standard, the 5th 
fastest computer in the world is a Linux cluster, the most popular webserver 
in the world (Apache) is under a BSD licence, and my 12yo daughter's 
favourite coputer games are FLOSS.

You may wonder at the Australian internet domain; consider me an expatriate: I 
was born in Merritt, British Columbia and exported, so I am both a Canadian 
and an Australian citizen.

Cheers; Leon

-- 
http://www.cyberknights.com.au/  Modern tools, traditional dedication
http://slpwa.linux.org.au/       Member, Linux Professionals West Aus
http://conf.linux.org.au/        THE Australian Linux Technical Conf:
                                 22-25 January 2003, Perth: be there!

Comments (10 posted)