People are not "heckling" you because you mentioned that a Linux distro has a bug. People criticize the fact that you are doing the equivalent of OH LOLOLOLZ LOOK OVER THERE THE PRODUCT OF A COMPANY I HATE HAS A BUG HAHAHAHA!!! EVERYBODY WITH ME OR WHAT!? HAHAHAHA!!!.
They do that because you are using the fact that openSUSE has a bug to disingenuously try to reinforce your overall criticism of Novell, as if a setting in /etc/fstab designed to protect data and sacrifice some speed is some sort of divine retribution from the Gods of GNU against Novell.
Will you attack Andreas or offer us an apology?
I honestly don't see how one thing could be related to the other, except in your mind maybe, where constructive criticism == attack.
Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.
Dan O'Brian
2008-12-18 01:07:31
I see that Roy has yet again failed at reading comprehension. Please note, at the very top of Andreas Jaeger's post:
Disk I/O - Safe or Fast?
We have barriers enabled for the ext3 filesystem. This is needed for filesystem integrity but forces at certain points a flush of disk writeback caches to prevent data corruption.
As Wikipedia states:
“Ext3 does not do checksumming when writing to the journal. If barrier=1 is not enabled as a mount option (in /etc/fstab), and if the hardware is doing out-of-order write caching, one runs the risk of severe filesystem corruption during a crash.”
With openSUSE barrier=1 is the default and even AFAIK openSUSE and SUSE Linux Enterprise are the only distributions enabling barriers by default.
If you want to disable barriers, use “mount -o barrier=0ââ¬Â³ on ext3 (or change /etc/fstab).
The gzip test for example gives on one of our machines the following results:
Oh look, that's exactly what AlexH was saying yesterday.
openSUSE defaults to data safety rather than raw speed. Depending on what you, as a user, care about, this isn't necessarily a Bad Thing(tm).
If your data being stored in the sqlite DB is "mission critical", then you'd likely prefer the added overhead of the fsync()ing.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 01:11:26
You're quoting selectively. I did not deny this part. People can read read the whole post.
Dan O'Brian
2008-12-18 01:28:23
Link-backs to AlexH's analysis and criticisms of your conclusion-jumping skills found here: [1][2
He specifically mentions that the reason the tests doing heavy disk-io (and specifically the sqlite test) were likely caused by ext3 barriers.
You asserted that openSUSE was inferior to the other distros because of said tests. You completely failed to take into consideration that openSUSE simply had ext3's data safety features enabled by default.
#
Roy Schestowitz said,
December 15, 2008 at 8:56 am
AlexH,
It’s nothing to do with Sqlite. It loses in several other tests too.
Face it. OpenSUSE (RC) is fat, other are fast. Unless you can come up with other tests, the fact remains.
Let's take a look at the other test where openSUSE fell behind, shall we?
X11 and Graphics - Performance of the Intel Driver
Looking at the graphics results, I see that OpenGL has the same performance but XRender is horribly slow, but Ubuntu sometimes(!) hits the same issue.
We have an upstream bug open about X11 speed (see here), and it’s considered the highest priority bug, still nobody has a clue where it comes from. This needs to be rechecked with the final version of openSUSE 11.1, though, because there are some indications that it got improved. Intel has apparently fixed some of that in a newer driver that is not available yet.
It would also be interesting to know whether Mandriva uses XAA or EXA, we do not use XAA for Intel driver any longer, since Intel as driver author does not want to support it, and it has issues with suspend and resume. The old XAA is currently better optimized than the new EXA.
Hmm, so Ubuntu also suffers from the same XRENDER performance problems sometimes. Apparently it's a known bug and that Intel may have fixed their drivers in an as-of-yet-unreleased version.
If it is a bug in the Intel drivers, then this would not be the fault of openSUSE, would it?
As Andreas also points out, it is possible that Madriva uses XAA rather than the newer, recommended, EXA. This could explain the difference in speed. As Intel is focusing on EXA for the future, the performance will only improve, eventually likely to leave XAA configurations behind.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 01:31:54
Unless they actually do this, you will not know. It would be interesting to see alphas under the the same bunch of tests/benchmarks.
Dan O'Brian
2008-12-18 01:47:19
According to his message, Mandriva has dropped their patch to restore XAA as the default acceleration method for Intel drivers on Oct 22, 2008.
Since Oct 22 was after the Mandriva 10 release (Oct 09), I guess that the benchmark was using XAA, unless Michael updated packages (which may or may not have included a new X which changed to defaulting to EXA).
Just something to think about.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 01:49:25
It's not necessarily the culprit, just a difference.
G. Michaels
2008-12-18 01:49:55
It would be interesting to see alphas under the the same bunch of tests/benchmarks.
This is the point where Roy finds himself confronted with actual evidence and cleverly tries to change the direction of the conversation, so it's no longer about the flagrant extremism of exploiting a simple bug in openSUSE to further his SLOG against Novell, but about interesting benchmarks.
Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.
Mandriva has dropped their patch to restore XAA as the default acceleration method for Intel drivers
Upstream XOrg is defaulting to EXA while Mandriva was applying a patch to revert the default back to XAA instead. At least up until Oct 22nd.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 01:52:36
Yes, but this says nothing about performance.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 01:53:33
Your hypothesis is that one single package (parameter in this test) is responsible for the anomalies.
Dan O'Brian
2008-12-18 02:22:06
Do you have a better suggestion on what the cause of the difference is? I suspect not.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 02:28:23
I don't assemble my own distribution, but the components or compilation parameters, e.g. for Linux (the kernel), may vary. The bottom line is that OpenSUSE binaries performed poorly in some tests.
twitter
2008-12-18 02:57:49
This is what I expected from the usual hecklers. No apology, just more bullshit. I wonder who they think they are fooling.
Sooner or later. Suse is going to suck. Novell has pissed off the community and embraced a bunch of poison. The kind of developers they have left are either comfortable with this or don't have a better way to pay the bills. Either way, distribution quality can be expected to fall as fewer resources are split among various demoralizing tasks. Trolls can nitpick the details but they can't get around the obvious.
Ian
2008-12-18 03:26:30
The kind of developers they have left are either comfortable with this or don’t have a better way to pay the bills. Either way, distribution quality can be expected to fall as fewer resources are split among various demoralizing tasks. Trolls can nitpick the details but they can’t get around the obvious.
In your angry frothing, I think you forgot what a Linux distribution is, how the software is community driven(for the most part), ignore the plethora of distributions that survive despite not paying employees to "develop", and oh yeah...free.
Seems to me you're missing something obvious and fundamental. Isn't this the stuff you're apparently advocating?
G. Michaels
2008-12-18 03:59:28
I don’t assemble my own distribution
No, that would imply actually contributing something to FOSS.
Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.
G. Michaels
2008-12-18 04:02:27
This is what I expected from the usual hecklers. No apology, just more bullshit. I wonder who they think they are fooling.
You know Will, I took a quick look at your posting history on Slashdot. I counted the number of posts made with your 14 accounts (the 'main' ones anyway), and these are the results:
That's 10,888 posts. Let me repeat that: Ten thousand, eight hundred and eighty-eight posts.
In the four or five years I've been part of that community, I've seen you shamed and humiliated probably hundreds of times by many Slashdot users who replied to your obnoxious comments and corrected your lies and outrageous claims. This of course eventually led to your virtual forced exile from there, since no one wants to be associated with people like you.
But not a single one of those instances where you've been clearly wrong (or just lying as usual) and promptly put in your place has ever elicited an apology, or even a half-proper response. At least I've never personally seen one. All you ever seemed to do was to cleverly nitpick or just take the easy route and insult people, calling them idiotic things like "twitter-hating trolls" and worse (especially your AC replies and stalking).
So please, go away. The grownups are talking about important things. Don't you have some more accounts to create on Digg or something?
Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.
teftolo-gam8
2008-12-18 08:10:27
Well, Roy S. is talking out of his arse again, surprise.
He perfectly knows that a) slower but safer ext3 settings and a buggy upstream intel-driver are not SUSE's fault and b) A. Jaeger doesn't apologize for a SUSE shortcoming - but he does write it nevertheless. Because he gives a shit about the truth.
Have fun Roy, you've ruined your credibility long ago. Spread lies, attack fellow Linux developers. The consequences are all your own to bear.
The Linux community has by now learned that R. S. is a big, fat liar that's not to be trusted.
Congratulations on making yourself and arse and making yourself an object of contempt within the Linux community.
AlexH
2008-12-18 08:30:32
Wow. You want an apology? Let's review what I said: it loses out on SQLite and Sunflow.
Lo and behold, that's exactly what Andreas said, and his assessment of the SQLite issue agrees exactly with what I posted.
I'm sorry Roy, but I'm not going to apologise. You called out the entire OpenSUSE distribution as "fat" and "slow". Turns out you were wrong, and the facts support my assessment.
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 10:07:52
This is what I expected from the usual hecklers. No apology, just more bullshit. I wonder who they think they are fooling.
ZOMG SWEARING!
Smack him down, Roy! He used a NAUGHTY WORD!
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 10:10:04
Spread lies, attack fellow Linux developers.
"Fellow"?
What does Roy do that earns him a title of "Linux developer"?
AlexH
2008-12-18 10:16:03
What's sad is that like many distributions, OpenSUSE is road-testing the valuable new additions and new features which we're all going to use. Fedora, Ubuntu and OpenSUSE are all particularly good at this: they bring in important new functionality and help shake the gubbins out of it.
Attacking distributions for having bugs is a great way to stop people doing this and put the brakes on free software development, because that kind of feedback is just so motivating.
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 10:17:41
I've never really thought of openSUSE as the place for that - for the gushing-edge features that don't really work yet, isn't Fedora the place to look?
AlexH
2008-12-18 10:26:51
Fedora is absolutely the number-one place, and Ubuntu and OpenSUSE come behind that a little - Ubuntu as a rule is relatively solid, but they shipped stuff like NetworkManager before Fedora, even though Red Hat developed it. OpenSUSE takes a similar approach: generally solid, but willing to try exciting new stuff - recall that SUSE basically single-handedly turned the desktop 3D, for example.
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 10:27:58
Surely that was Sun? Remember Project Looking Glass? :p
AlexH
2008-12-18 10:34:32
I wasn't trying to imply that Novell were the first to think of having desktops in 3D, but they were the first to actually make it happen with Xgl and compiz. It's now a standard feature.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 10:36:11
I see the hecklers can't get enough of themselves (just spewing insults). You said OpenSUSE was not slower. Well, it is. It's that simple.
AlexH
2008-12-18 10:40:21
@Roy: a single X.org bug doesn't make "OpenSUSE slower".
Calling people "hecklers" is also pretty insulting, too, btw.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 10:48:02
Your purpose here is to heckle the messenger, so you quality as one.
AlexH
2008-12-18 11:07:11
No, my purpose here is to correct the "facts" you present in your attacks on free software projects. I could care less who the messenger is; in this case it happens to be you, on other sites it's other people. Doesn't matter. Attacks on free software are attacks on free software.
Like in this example.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 11:08:35
You very often just nitpick. Your goal is to harm the credibility of the messenger.
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 11:20:44
He doesn't need to.
You manage that yourself by lying.
stevetheFLY
2008-12-18 11:20:48
Roy Schestowitz is a devious demagogue.
A liar when he finds it conventient.
Neglecting truth whenever it serves his cause.
Rotten to the bone.
@Roy: what you class as "nitpicking" and what I do are obviously two entirely different things. When you post an opinion and all the facts are wrong, I call out the problems with the facts. Your opinion tends to be unrelated to the facts, so you try to defend it.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 12:02:41
When I write a very long post you can pick a single word or statement and derail the discussion. There are many examples like that.
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 12:07:45
Where do you see a lie?
On about 50% of your posts. Whenever I call you out on it, infact. I haven't been keeping a list.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 12:14:03
Show examples, please. A lot of what you call "lies" are not lies; they are perspective you simply disagree with.
AlexH
2008-12-18 12:22:36
"OpenSUSE is fat" appears to be a relevant conclusion that has been shown definitively to be erroneous.
Of course, I'm sure you still support that statement :D
That's correct and I've already defended this in the discussion about the second post/link.
AlexH
2008-12-18 12:41:58
@Roy: er, no, it isn't. Perhaps take the time to review what he wrote again.
He confirmed a single slow-down in one X.org component.
He also repeated the disk i/o benchmarks with the correct configuration and, astoundingly, the results were the same as the other distros...
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 12:45:30
He did a quick ext3 test. It's not showing what you claim it shows.
AlexH
2008-12-18 12:50:32
No, he repeated the Gzip test, where OpenSUSE matched Fedora 10 anyway, and showed that it got much better results (unsurprisingly) with a configuration which doesn't guarantee data security.
You can't argue the facts, Roy.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:01:21
This is only one test.
You can't just selectively select facts, Alex.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:07:21
To clarify, the burden of proof is OpenSUSE's, not mine.
AlexH
2008-12-18 13:11:01
Roy, it's not one test, as you know because this was explained to you fully the other day. With ext3 write barriers enabled, I/O benchmarks - like GZip, like SQLite - will take longer because data is being stored safely. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that having write barriers enabled on OpenSUSE and not on Ubuntu (for example) will make the benchmark "look worse".
I pointed out this problem with the SQLite test on the article you remonstrated with them. It's not comparing like-with-like, and actually OpenSUSE is getting it right as compared to doing it as fast as possible.
The only slow-down that is particular to OpenSUSE, as Andreas points out, is the EXA vs. XAA issue in X.org.
Looking at the totality of the testing, there is no evidence that OpenSUSE as a distribution is "fat". There is one bug that was picked up in one test, and that is a fact.
AlexH
2008-12-18 13:12:03
@Roy: you seem to totally misunderstand what "burden of proof" means. It lies on the person making the claim: that would be you when you said "OpenSUSE is fat" and based that claim on a benchmark, when even the people running the benchmark didn't draw that conclusion.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:16:12
I know very well what “burden of proof” means and it's down to you/Novell/OpenSUSE to prove that Michael's benchmarks are not fair. Don't attack the messengers.
stevetheFLY
2008-12-18 13:22:39
Roy is a big fat liar, no use arguing with him, Alex.
This "don't attack the messenger" meme is getting boring, Roy. I haven't attacked you once in this thread, what I have attacked is your insistence on defending your claim that OpenSUSE is "fat" in the fact of the evidence.
I've already shown you one explicit example of where the benchmark is not fair. The SQLite insert test does not use a transaction, and so the cost of disk I/O wait is incurred on every line, instead of SQLite journalling the changes.
I've also shown you why testing with write barriers enabled leads the benchmark to a different result due to the increased data security offered by the operating system. You wouldn't benchmark an OS on two different computer systems and compare.
As I said before: the only issue on the table is the X.org bug, and no-one is denying that. What is wrong, though, is extrapolating from a single bug and saying that the whole distribution is "fat". That's your claim, and you're thus far completely unable to defend it.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:25:46
No, it's "fat" but some people have an explanation as to why. I suppose you could go about semantics and try to define "fat".
Absolute, 100% verifiable, complete and total lies.
Here comes the alarm!
LIE ALERT! LIE ALERT!
Here's the PROOF that you're a liar:
The first entry of Mono into Debian is here:
mono (0.13-1) unstable; urgency=low
* Initial release.
-- Alp Toker Sun, 28 Apr 2002 22:10:10 +0100
Ubuntu didn't even EXIST when Debian was adding Mono to the archive. It didn't exist for another two years.
You still claim that Mono in Debian is the result of some kind of pressure from Ubuntu? How deluded ARE you?
and I’ve already defended this in the discussion about the second post/link.
You defended it by lying more!
AlexH
2008-12-18 13:32:47
@Roy: unfortunately the facts stand, despite your desire to redefine the word "fat". Your claim is that OpenSUSE is slower than the opposition, the fact is that it is not - bar the X.org problem.
I find it absolutely hysterical that you call on people publicly to apologise for pointing out the errors in your original article, even though they've been demonstrated time and again.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:34:37
@Jo Shields (Mono maintainer),
You're referring to something that I uttered in an IRC channel. How pathetic. Moreover, Debian's decision to stick with Mono is partly influenced by Ubuntu's (Canonical's) policy. See Fedora's remarks for insight into the sheep effect ("everyone is doing it, so..").
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:37:08
AlexH said:
...bar the X.org problem.
Oh, I see.... let's just remove the inconvenient facts.
[T]he only issue on the table is the X.org bug, and no-one is denying that. What is wrong, though, is extrapolating from a single bug and saying that the whole distribution is “fat”.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:44:52
It's not an extrapolation. The distribution as a whole contains this bug.
stevetheFLY
2008-12-18 13:45:39
If only Roy understood how much he hurts the cause he believes to serve. His lying schemes and personal attacks are so easy to see through that one could easily belive all criticism of Novell would just be thought-up mischief. His repelling behavior and personality alone are enough to convince anyone to use openSUSE...
Debian’s decision to stick with Mono is partly influenced by Ubuntu’s (Canonical’s) policy.
Can I expect to see any proof at some point, or are we sticking with the time-travel-based option?
You know the real problem here, Roy? The absolute crux-of-the-matter problem?
By not only constantly saying things which are verifiable wrong, but attempting to twist reality until you can somehow pretend you're right, your credibility is slashed in the process. You're not a guy who makes mistakes on occasion, you're a guy who will defend outright lies to the death.
And with your credibility swirling lower than the National Enquirer, and your ethics somewhere below Bill O'Reilley or Ann Coulter, how can anyone believe ANYTHING you say? Even when you're actually right, people ASSUME YOU'RE WRONG.
You're the boy who cried wolf, Roy.
If you could grow up and ADMIT YOUR MISTAKES, it would help your credibility. As it stands, it couldn't go any lower.
AlexH
2008-12-18 13:49:40
Oh man. Distributions contain a tonne of bugs, some of them extremely serious sometimes. How many Debian users do you think switched due to the enormous ssh key feck-up? Not many, I would bet.
If you think you can label OpenSUSE on the basis of a single bug, then I guess that's where we fundamentally disagree.
I've just wasted 10 minutes trying to find an E-mail I was unable to find.
SubSonica
2008-12-18 14:29:25
"AlexH said,
No, my purpose here is to correct the “facts”"
It very much reminds me of the "Get the facts" campaign motto...
" you present in your attacks on free software projects. I could care less who the messenger is; in this case it happens to be you, on other sites it’s other people. Doesn’t matter. Attacks on free software are attacks on free software."
Well, Novell patent-protection-racket agreement with Microsoft is Nۼ 1 attack on free software. SW Patents are the threat, the weapkn. And Microsoft is the attacker (with Novell as accomplice), not Roy. Why don't you criticize that in the first place? It entails danger for anyone using any technology related to microsoft (Mono, Silverlight, MSOOXML) -except those who pay MSFT for "protection"- .
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 14:29:31
How terribly inconvenient.
If it was from rmh@debian, I'm not interested
Dan O'Brian
2008-12-18 15:06:22
Roy Schestowitz said,
December 18, 2008 at 9:25 am
I’ve just wasted 10 minutes trying to find an E-mail I was unable to find.
Why is it that you always lose the email and/or the person doesn't want what they say to be repeated publicly?
Is it because these "sources" are all in your imagination?
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 15:11:44
Not finding != missing.
Dan O'Brian
2008-12-18 15:43:16
the difference is irrelevant, whether you "can't find it" or if it's "missing" - I'm left wondering if the email ever existed in the first place, especially considering how often you use this same excuse.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 15:49:10
It was about Go-OO and Mono. And no, Jo, it's not who you think it is.
AlexH
2008-12-19 08:18:58
@SubSonica: I do criticise them for patents (and other things) on a regular basis, including here.
Comments
G. Michaels
2008-12-18 00:47:01
People are not "heckling" you because you mentioned that a Linux distro has a bug. People criticize the fact that you are doing the equivalent of OH LOLOLOLZ LOOK OVER THERE THE PRODUCT OF A COMPANY I HATE HAS A BUG HAHAHAHA!!! EVERYBODY WITH ME OR WHAT!? HAHAHAHA!!!.
They do that because you are using the fact that openSUSE has a bug to disingenuously try to reinforce your overall criticism of Novell, as if a setting in /etc/fstab designed to protect data and sacrifice some speed is some sort of divine retribution from the Gods of GNU against Novell.
I honestly don't see how one thing could be related to the other, except in your mind maybe, where constructive criticism == attack.
Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.
Dan O'Brian
2008-12-18 01:07:31
Oh look, that's exactly what AlexH was saying yesterday.
openSUSE defaults to data safety rather than raw speed. Depending on what you, as a user, care about, this isn't necessarily a Bad Thing(tm).
If your data being stored in the sqlite DB is "mission critical", then you'd likely prefer the added overhead of the fsync()ing.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 01:11:26
Dan O'Brian
2008-12-18 01:28:23
He specifically mentions that the reason the tests doing heavy disk-io (and specifically the sqlite test) were likely caused by ext3 barriers.
You asserted that openSUSE was inferior to the other distros because of said tests. You completely failed to take into consideration that openSUSE simply had ext3's data safety features enabled by default.
Let's take a look at the other test where openSUSE fell behind, shall we?
Hmm, so Ubuntu also suffers from the same XRENDER performance problems sometimes. Apparently it's a known bug and that Intel may have fixed their drivers in an as-of-yet-unreleased version.
If it is a bug in the Intel drivers, then this would not be the fault of openSUSE, would it?
As Andreas also points out, it is possible that Madriva uses XAA rather than the newer, recommended, EXA. This could explain the difference in speed. As Intel is focusing on EXA for the future, the performance will only improve, eventually likely to leave XAA configurations behind.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 01:31:54
Dan O'Brian
2008-12-18 01:47:19
Since Oct 22 was after the Mandriva 10 release (Oct 09), I guess that the benchmark was using XAA, unless Michael updated packages (which may or may not have included a new X which changed to defaulting to EXA).
Just something to think about.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 01:49:25
G. Michaels
2008-12-18 01:49:55
This is the point where Roy finds himself confronted with actual evidence and cleverly tries to change the direction of the conversation, so it's no longer about the flagrant extremism of exploiting a simple bug in openSUSE to further his SLOG against Novell, but about interesting benchmarks.
Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.
Dan O'Brian
2008-12-18 01:50:19
Also, in case this wasn't clear:
Upstream XOrg is defaulting to EXA while Mandriva was applying a patch to revert the default back to XAA instead. At least up until Oct 22nd.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 01:52:36
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 01:53:33
Dan O'Brian
2008-12-18 02:22:06
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 02:28:23
twitter
2008-12-18 02:57:49
Sooner or later. Suse is going to suck. Novell has pissed off the community and embraced a bunch of poison. The kind of developers they have left are either comfortable with this or don't have a better way to pay the bills. Either way, distribution quality can be expected to fall as fewer resources are split among various demoralizing tasks. Trolls can nitpick the details but they can't get around the obvious.
Ian
2008-12-18 03:26:30
In your angry frothing, I think you forgot what a Linux distribution is, how the software is community driven(for the most part), ignore the plethora of distributions that survive despite not paying employees to "develop", and oh yeah...free.
Seems to me you're missing something obvious and fundamental. Isn't this the stuff you're apparently advocating?
G. Michaels
2008-12-18 03:59:28
No, that would imply actually contributing something to FOSS.
Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.
G. Michaels
2008-12-18 04:02:27
You know Will, I took a quick look at your posting history on Slashdot. I counted the number of posts made with your 14 accounts (the 'main' ones anyway), and these are the results:
twitter: 8,104 Erris: 1,777 Mactrope: 112. gnutoo: 331 willeyhill: 45 westbake: 107 inTheLoo: 131 Odder: 141 ibane: 40 freenix: 50 myCopyWrong: 29 right handed: 22
That's 10,888 posts. Let me repeat that: Ten thousand, eight hundred and eighty-eight posts.
In the four or five years I've been part of that community, I've seen you shamed and humiliated probably hundreds of times by many Slashdot users who replied to your obnoxious comments and corrected your lies and outrageous claims. This of course eventually led to your virtual forced exile from there, since no one wants to be associated with people like you.
But not a single one of those instances where you've been clearly wrong (or just lying as usual) and promptly put in your place has ever elicited an apology, or even a half-proper response. At least I've never personally seen one. All you ever seemed to do was to cleverly nitpick or just take the easy route and insult people, calling them idiotic things like "twitter-hating trolls" and worse (especially your AC replies and stalking).
So please, go away. The grownups are talking about important things. Don't you have some more accounts to create on Digg or something?
Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.
teftolo-gam8
2008-12-18 08:10:27
He perfectly knows that a) slower but safer ext3 settings and a buggy upstream intel-driver are not SUSE's fault and b) A. Jaeger doesn't apologize for a SUSE shortcoming - but he does write it nevertheless. Because he gives a shit about the truth.
Have fun Roy, you've ruined your credibility long ago. Spread lies, attack fellow Linux developers. The consequences are all your own to bear.
The Linux community has by now learned that R. S. is a big, fat liar that's not to be trusted.
Congratulations on making yourself and arse and making yourself an object of contempt within the Linux community.
AlexH
2008-12-18 08:30:32
Lo and behold, that's exactly what Andreas said, and his assessment of the SQLite issue agrees exactly with what I posted.
I'm sorry Roy, but I'm not going to apologise. You called out the entire OpenSUSE distribution as "fat" and "slow". Turns out you were wrong, and the facts support my assessment.
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 10:07:52
ZOMG SWEARING!
Smack him down, Roy! He used a NAUGHTY WORD!
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 10:10:04
"Fellow"?
What does Roy do that earns him a title of "Linux developer"?
AlexH
2008-12-18 10:16:03
Attacking distributions for having bugs is a great way to stop people doing this and put the brakes on free software development, because that kind of feedback is just so motivating.
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 10:17:41
AlexH
2008-12-18 10:26:51
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 10:27:58
AlexH
2008-12-18 10:34:32
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 10:36:11
AlexH
2008-12-18 10:40:21
Calling people "hecklers" is also pretty insulting, too, btw.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 10:48:02
AlexH
2008-12-18 11:07:11
Like in this example.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 11:08:35
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 11:20:44
You manage that yourself by lying.
stevetheFLY
2008-12-18 11:20:48
A liar when he finds it conventient. Neglecting truth whenever it serves his cause. Rotten to the bone.
He is Wormtongue.
Enjoy you new name.
Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an incarnation of a known (eet), pseudonymous, forever-nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 11:49:42
Where do you see a lie?
AlexH
2008-12-18 11:55:35
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 12:02:41
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 12:07:45
On about 50% of your posts. Whenever I call you out on it, infact. I haven't been keeping a list.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 12:14:03
AlexH
2008-12-18 12:22:36
Of course, I'm sure you still support that statement :D
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 12:24:22
http://boycottnovell.com/2008/11/28/irc-log-27112008/#tNov%2027%2002:02:48
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 12:25:55
http://boycottnovell.com/2008/11/28/microsoft-winforms-ubuntu/
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 12:34:31
That was factual and it's confirmed by Andreas.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 12:36:34
That's correct and I've already defended this in the discussion about the second post/link.
AlexH
2008-12-18 12:41:58
He confirmed a single slow-down in one X.org component.
He also repeated the disk i/o benchmarks with the correct configuration and, astoundingly, the results were the same as the other distros...
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 12:45:30
AlexH
2008-12-18 12:50:32
You can't argue the facts, Roy.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:01:21
You can't just selectively select facts, Alex.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:07:21
AlexH
2008-12-18 13:11:01
I pointed out this problem with the SQLite test on the article you remonstrated with them. It's not comparing like-with-like, and actually OpenSUSE is getting it right as compared to doing it as fast as possible.
The only slow-down that is particular to OpenSUSE, as Andreas points out, is the EXA vs. XAA issue in X.org.
Looking at the totality of the testing, there is no evidence that OpenSUSE as a distribution is "fat". There is one bug that was picked up in one test, and that is a fact.
AlexH
2008-12-18 13:12:03
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:16:12
stevetheFLY
2008-12-18 13:22:39
Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an incarnation of a known (eet), pseudonymous, forever-nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.
AlexH
2008-12-18 13:23:06
I've already shown you one explicit example of where the benchmark is not fair. The SQLite insert test does not use a transaction, and so the cost of disk I/O wait is incurred on every line, instead of SQLite journalling the changes.
I've also shown you why testing with write barriers enabled leads the benchmark to a different result due to the increased data security offered by the operating system. You wouldn't benchmark an OS on two different computer systems and compare.
As I said before: the only issue on the table is the X.org bug, and no-one is denying that. What is wrong, though, is extrapolating from a single bug and saying that the whole distribution is "fat". That's your claim, and you're thus far completely unable to defend it.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:25:46
stevetheFLY
2008-12-18 13:26:56
Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an incarnation of a known (eet), pseudonymous, forever-nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 13:27:50
Absolute, 100% verifiable, complete and total lies.
Here comes the alarm!
LIE ALERT! LIE ALERT!
Here's the PROOF that you're a liar:
The first entry of Mono into Debian is here:
Ubuntu didn't even EXIST when Debian was adding Mono to the archive. It didn't exist for another two years.
You still claim that Mono in Debian is the result of some kind of pressure from Ubuntu? How deluded ARE you?
You defended it by lying more!
AlexH
2008-12-18 13:32:47
I find it absolutely hysterical that you call on people publicly to apologise for pointing out the errors in your original article, even though they've been demonstrated time and again.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:34:37
You're referring to something that I uttered in an IRC channel. How pathetic. Moreover, Debian's decision to stick with Mono is partly influenced by Ubuntu's (Canonical's) policy. See Fedora's remarks for insight into the sheep effect ("everyone is doing it, so..").
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:37:08
Oh, I see.... let's just remove the inconvenient facts.
AlexH
2008-12-18 13:39:39
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 13:44:52
stevetheFLY
2008-12-18 13:45:39
Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an incarnation of a known (eet), pseudonymous, forever-nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 13:47:58
Can I expect to see any proof at some point, or are we sticking with the time-travel-based option?
You know the real problem here, Roy? The absolute crux-of-the-matter problem?
By not only constantly saying things which are verifiable wrong, but attempting to twist reality until you can somehow pretend you're right, your credibility is slashed in the process. You're not a guy who makes mistakes on occasion, you're a guy who will defend outright lies to the death.
And with your credibility swirling lower than the National Enquirer, and your ethics somewhere below Bill O'Reilley or Ann Coulter, how can anyone believe ANYTHING you say? Even when you're actually right, people ASSUME YOU'RE WRONG.
You're the boy who cried wolf, Roy.
If you could grow up and ADMIT YOUR MISTAKES, it would help your credibility. As it stands, it couldn't go any lower.
AlexH
2008-12-18 13:49:40
If you think you can label OpenSUSE on the basis of a single bug, then I guess that's where we fundamentally disagree.
AlexH
2008-12-18 13:51:21
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 14:00:30
Back to personal attacks, I see...
I know what some Debian developers are saying.
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 14:08:06
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 14:25:52
SubSonica
2008-12-18 14:29:25
No, my purpose here is to correct the “facts”"
It very much reminds me of the "Get the facts" campaign motto...
" you present in your attacks on free software projects. I could care less who the messenger is; in this case it happens to be you, on other sites it’s other people. Doesn’t matter. Attacks on free software are attacks on free software."
Well, Novell patent-protection-racket agreement with Microsoft is Nۼ 1 attack on free software. SW Patents are the threat, the weapkn. And Microsoft is the attacker (with Novell as accomplice), not Roy. Why don't you criticize that in the first place? It entails danger for anyone using any technology related to microsoft (Mono, Silverlight, MSOOXML) -except those who pay MSFT for "protection"- .
Jo Shields
2008-12-18 14:29:31
If it was from rmh@debian, I'm not interested
Dan O'Brian
2008-12-18 15:06:22
Why is it that you always lose the email and/or the person doesn't want what they say to be repeated publicly?
Is it because these "sources" are all in your imagination?
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 15:11:44
Dan O'Brian
2008-12-18 15:43:16
Roy Schestowitz
2008-12-18 15:49:10
AlexH
2008-12-19 08:18:58
I just refuse to be cowed by their patents.