Importance of Uptime

Importance of Uptime

Post by Kenneth Down » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 02:52:47



If even five minutes for a reboot is five minutes too much -- you need
Linux.  

Here's a crack at explaining why we go on and on about uptime.

First, I am a quality freak.  I like Linux because I can learn from its
designers.  With Windows, I get the feeling they need to learn some things
from me.

Because the computer cannot service anyone when it is not running, we want
it to always be running.  Ideally, this means 100.00% no matter what (not
99.99, or 99.9999, but 100.00).

So this is the ideal, 100.00% always doing what I want.  Come to think of
it, it's as simple as that.

Some of our more regular fudsters will point out that in a practical
situation, nobody expects 100% uptime (which sadly is true, we used to
expect it, but not anymore).  For instance, A collection of machines can be
used to provide 100% (measured practically) availability if well-crafted.  
But the overall reliability of a collection (cluster, mirrors,
load-balancing, what have you) is always a function of the average
availability of the components.

So no matter what, you always come down to that basic number, the average
uptime of an individual machine.  This determines everything about your
system.  

This is another reason why I love linux.  Since
setting up this box and getting comfortable 3 months ago, I have added and
removed gads of software, have had Apache and Exim running almost since day
1, have read all kinds of security notices and turned off all kinds of
services, have put services onto new ports, have stopped and restarted the
network, yada yada yada.

What I have never done, except for 3 HW changes in the beginning, is
deliberately down it for any reason.

First, you know what?  At NO TIME since that first Install CD came out has
the system ever asked me to reboot.  Never.  That's a new email server.  
Lots of trial and error on the web server.  Install Samba, rip out samba,
install Samba again.  Dink around with the logs.  Run crappy beta software
that craps out.  

REPEAT:  NEVER HAS THE OS REQUESTED A REBOOT

Compare this to my Win2k box in Real Life.  Install the AS/400 Client
Express, wants to reboot.  Is it the end of the world?  No.  But it reveals
a mindset that says its no big deal to bring down my machine -- WHEN I DID
NOT DECIDE TO.  What if I needed to install that connection system on a
server that had people logged in?  Time to get on the PA, "Attention all
users, the <insert server role> server will be going down for reboot in
five minutes..."  Or, of course, you can stay late for the sake of your
users.  I'm sure the family won't mind.  I don't like companies who think
it is OK to do this to me, my family, or my users.

Let's not even talk about putting .net beta onto a machine whose config you
have lovingly crafted.  (OK, it's beta, but G**D**T, Linux beta stuff
doesn't trash my entire system).

Next, I've never had the OS just plain *out on me.  Nobody has provided
me with a snippet of code similar to the one on the "Compile this code"
thread that I could compile and run that would crash an entire Linux box.  
You can do that in WinNT/2k/xp though.  One unpriveleged user can down the
entire system.

But in Linux?  NOW, IF IT EXISTED, ONE OF OUR HELPFUL "KEEP THEM HONEST"
WINVOCATES WOULD HAVE POSTED IT.  Where is it?  Where is the code that I
can run as a non-priveleged user that will bring down my entire box?  And,
if it is found, how long before it is patched and goes away forever?  I'd
almost love to see the code just to see how quickly the patch follows.

So I like linux because I like uptime.  I can't do anything if the system
is not up.

Windows is B.A.D - (B)roken (A)s (D)esigned, because it requires reboots
just to install software.  The designers of that software fundamentally do
not know the value of my time.  And don't tell me about XP, cuz I done paid
my good money for 2K and I want them to fix that the way the open/free
folks fixed glibz and SSH.

If even five minutes for a reboot is too much -- you need Linux.

--
Ken
Linux, the more you learn, the more you love

 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by Linon » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 05:05:21


After takin' a swig o' grog, Kenneth Downs belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Quote:> If even five minutes for a reboot is five minutes too much -- you need
> Linux.  

I done already told you I wasted 4 hours reinstalling NT and getting it
up to the latest service pack and browser!  An' now you're tellin'
me it shouldn'a hadn'ta oughtn'a taken all the time!

oo *groan* oo

 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by rapska » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 05:26:41


Error Log for Thu, 14 Mar 2002 21:52:34 -0500: segfault in module
"flatfish+++" - dump details are as follows...



>>If even five minutes for a reboot is five minutes too much -- you need
>>Linux.

>>Here's a crack at explaining why we go on and on about uptime.

> Snip a bunch of stuff that DownSyndrome doesn't know about......

> So run AIX....

> Hot swappable hardware via chrp.....................

> Case closed..............

Does AIX run on Intel x86 platforms?  I didn't know that.  And it's
available either for free or at a low cost as well?  I may just look into
that....

Well, I looked, and the answer is "NO" for both.  Get a clue, flattie.

--
rapskat  - 10:20pm  up 1 day, 12:30,  3 users,  load average: 0.08, 0.08, 0.07

You Know You Need To Upgrade When...
You can still read the letter that you typed to your mom last month on your monitor...even when it's off.

 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by Kenneth Down » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 06:20:43



> After takin' a swig o' grog, Kenneth Downs belched out this bit o' wisdom:

>> If even five minutes for a reboot is five minutes too much -- you need
>> Linux.

> I done already told you I wasted 4 hours reinstalling NT and getting it
> up to the latest service pack and browser!  An' now you're tellin'
> me it shouldn'a hadn'ta oughtn'a taken all the time!

> oo *groan* oo

Well, you aren't expecting any sympathy from us are you? <ducking>

I gave a response in your other thread that I hope will be taken in the
humorous context I intended, but seriously:

My customers always accepted what I gave them.  I like to think I was
giving them good quality and that's why.  At least, that's what I always
tell myself.

But family!  Holy moly!  The absolute worst customers of all, considering I
pay to be a member of this family (remember when you were a kid and you
thought, when I grow up and get a job I'll have my *own* money, ha ha ha).  

So I turned all of their demands back on them and said, "Sorry folks, this
overworked home sysadmin no longer supports the Windows platform.  It's an
all-Linux shop."  This was purely for my benefit, a stable and non-crashing
platform gives me some rest at last.

Harry Potter of course was a big concern, but you know what?  My daughter
spends a lot more time with KTamaga and Mahjongg than she ever did with
that commercial crash-ware.  

Put your foot down linonut!

--
Ken
Linux, the more you learn, the more you love

 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by rapska » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 07:10:19


Error Log for Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:20:43 -0500: segfault in module "Kenneth
Downs" - dump details are as follows...


>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Kenneth Downs belched out this bit o'
>> wisdom:

>>> If even five minutes for a reboot is five minutes too much -- you need
>>> Linux.

>> I done already told you I wasted 4 hours reinstalling NT and getting it
>> up to the latest service pack and browser!  An' now you're tellin' me
>> it shouldn'a hadn'ta oughtn'a taken all the time!

>> oo *groan* oo

> Well, you aren't expecting any sympathy from us are you? <ducking>

> I gave a response in your other thread that I hope will be taken in the
> humorous context I intended, but seriously:

> My customers always accepted what I gave them.  I like to think I was
> giving them good quality and that's why.  At least, that's what I always
> tell myself.

> But family!  Holy moly!  The absolute worst customers of all,
> considering I pay to be a member of this family (remember when you were
> a kid and you thought, when I grow up and get a job I'll have my *own*
> money, ha ha ha).

> So I turned all of their demands back on them and said, "Sorry folks,
> this overworked home sysadmin no longer supports the Windows platform.
> It's an all-Linux shop."  This was purely for my benefit, a stable and
> non-crashing platform gives me some rest at last.

> Harry Potter of course was a big concern, but you know what?  My
> daughter spends a lot more time with KTamaga and Mahjongg than she ever
> did with that commercial crash-ware.

> Put your foot down linonut!

Amen, had to tell the wife Look, you wanna use windows, fine by me, but
next time your system locks up or is not performing well or you get a

She came around pretty quick, and now she is lovin' it! (Plus I haven't
had a help request from her since I put MDK in ;-)

--
rapskat  - 12:05am  up 1 day, 14:15,  3 users,  load average: 0.17, 0.13, 0.09

The only dumb question is the one that wasn't asked. -- Anonymous

 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by mlw » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 06:59:50


Top post (sorry)

I like the spirit of this post. It is what advocacy is all about. And thank you
for making a case for "uptime." You put into words what we have always thought
but never taken the time to express.

An OS that askes you to reboot is one in which the designers failed. I can
understand upgrading to a different version, I can understand adding new
hardware, but come on now, adding software?

Nope, I started Windows development on version 1.03, the rebooot *was OK
when you had a floppy based system.


> If even five minutes for a reboot is five minutes too much -- you need
> Linux.

> Here's a crack at explaining why we go on and on about uptime.

> First, I am a quality freak.  I like Linux because I can learn from its
> designers.  With Windows, I get the feeling they need to learn some things
> from me.

> Because the computer cannot service anyone when it is not running, we want
> it to always be running.  Ideally, this means 100.00% no matter what (not
> 99.99, or 99.9999, but 100.00).

> So this is the ideal, 100.00% always doing what I want.  Come to think of
> it, it's as simple as that.

> Some of our more regular fudsters will point out that in a practical
> situation, nobody expects 100% uptime (which sadly is true, we used to
> expect it, but not anymore).  For instance, A collection of machines can be
> used to provide 100% (measured practically) availability if well-crafted.
> But the overall reliability of a collection (cluster, mirrors,
> load-balancing, what have you) is always a function of the average
> availability of the components.

> So no matter what, you always come down to that basic number, the average
> uptime of an individual machine.  This determines everything about your
> system.

> This is another reason why I love linux.  Since
> setting up this box and getting comfortable 3 months ago, I have added and
> removed gads of software, have had Apache and Exim running almost since day
> 1, have read all kinds of security notices and turned off all kinds of
> services, have put services onto new ports, have stopped and restarted the
> network, yada yada yada.

> What I have never done, except for 3 HW changes in the beginning, is
> deliberately down it for any reason.

> First, you know what?  At NO TIME since that first Install CD came out has
> the system ever asked me to reboot.  Never.  That's a new email server.
> Lots of trial and error on the web server.  Install Samba, rip out samba,
> install Samba again.  Dink around with the logs.  Run crappy beta software
> that craps out.

> REPEAT:  NEVER HAS THE OS REQUESTED A REBOOT

> Compare this to my Win2k box in Real Life.  Install the AS/400 Client
> Express, wants to reboot.  Is it the end of the world?  No.  But it reveals
> a mindset that says its no big deal to bring down my machine -- WHEN I DID
> NOT DECIDE TO.  What if I needed to install that connection system on a
> server that had people logged in?  Time to get on the PA, "Attention all
> users, the <insert server role> server will be going down for reboot in
> five minutes..."  Or, of course, you can stay late for the sake of your
> users.  I'm sure the family won't mind.  I don't like companies who think
> it is OK to do this to me, my family, or my users.

> Let's not even talk about putting .net beta onto a machine whose config you
> have lovingly crafted.  (OK, it's beta, but G**D**T, Linux beta stuff
> doesn't trash my entire system).

> Next, I've never had the OS just plain *out on me.  Nobody has provided
> me with a snippet of code similar to the one on the "Compile this code"
> thread that I could compile and run that would crash an entire Linux box.
> You can do that in WinNT/2k/xp though.  One unpriveleged user can down the
> entire system.

> But in Linux?  NOW, IF IT EXISTED, ONE OF OUR HELPFUL "KEEP THEM HONEST"
> WINVOCATES WOULD HAVE POSTED IT.  Where is it?  Where is the code that I
> can run as a non-priveleged user that will bring down my entire box?  And,
> if it is found, how long before it is patched and goes away forever?  I'd
> almost love to see the code just to see how quickly the patch follows.

> So I like linux because I like uptime.  I can't do anything if the system
> is not up.

> Windows is B.A.D - (B)roken (A)s (D)esigned, because it requires reboots
> just to install software.  The designers of that software fundamentally do
> not know the value of my time.  And don't tell me about XP, cuz I done paid
> my good money for 2K and I want them to fix that the way the open/free
> folks fixed glibz and SSH.

> If even five minutes for a reboot is too much -- you need Linux.

> --
> Ken
> Linux, the more you learn, the more you love

 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by GreyClou » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 09:23:47





> >If even five minutes for a reboot is five minutes too much -- you need
> >Linux.

> >Here's a crack at explaining why we go on and on about uptime.

> Snip a bunch of stuff that DownSyndrome doesn't know about......

> So run AIX....

> Hot swappable hardware via chrp.....................

> Case closed..............

Yep. Old flathead is at it again.  Better take them meds,
it's showing.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

VMS uptime is measured by the calendar and not by the
stopwatch.

 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by Erik Funkenbusc » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 10:00:42



Quote:> Top post (sorry)

> I like the spirit of this post. It is what advocacy is all about. And
thank you
> for making a case for "uptime." You put into words what we have always
thought
> but never taken the time to express.

> An OS that askes you to reboot is one in which the designers failed. I can
> understand upgrading to a different version, I can understand adding new
> hardware, but come on now, adding software?

> Nope, I started Windows development on version 1.03, the rebooot *was
OK
> when you had a floppy based system.

There is never a reason why you *HAVE* to reboot Windows (except for service
packs which replace the kernel and certain always in-use files), it's just
that rebooting is easier than manually fixing things up.

The usual reason to force a reboot is that some files are in-use when you
install them.  You can minimize or even completely eliminate this problem by
shutting down any services which depend on those files.  This will make a
reboot unneccesary.  You may ask why the OS doesn't allow in-use files to be
replaced, and the answer is that C2 doesn't allow them to, even by root
(administrator), otherwise you could replace audit logs with doctored copies
and cover your tracks.

 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by Shane Phelp » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 10:31:59



> Error Log for Thu, 14 Mar 2002 21:52:34 -0500: segfault in module
> "flatfish+++" - dump details are as follows...



> >>If even five minutes for a reboot is five minutes too much -- you need
> >>Linux.

> >>Here's a crack at explaining why we go on and on about uptime.

> > Snip a bunch of stuff that DownSyndrome doesn't know about......

> > So run AIX....

> > Hot swappable hardware via chrp.....................

> > Case closed..............

> Does AIX run on Intel x86 platforms?  I didn't know that.  And it's
> available either for free or at a low cost as well?  I may just look into
> that....

Solaris runs on x86 and is available for free.

You still have to pay mucho dinero for hot-swap hardware, et al, though :-(

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> Well, I looked, and the answer is "NO" for both.  Get a clue, flattie.

> --
> rapskat  - 10:20pm  up 1 day, 12:30,  3 users,  load average: 0.08, 0.08, 0.07

> You Know You Need To Upgrade When...
> You can still read the letter that you typed to your mom last month on your monitor...even when it's off.

 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by Albert Solson » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 10:18:17



Quote:> But in Linux?  NOW, IF IT EXISTED, ONE OF OUR HELPFUL "KEEP THEM HONEST"
> WINVOCATES WOULD HAVE POSTED IT.  Where is it?  Where is the code that I
> can run as a non-priveleged user that will bring down my entire box?  And,
> if it is found, how long before it is patched and goes away forever?  I'd
> almost love to see the code just to see how quickly the patch follows.

   Okay, you seem to believe that Linux is the perfection made OS. Have you
ever
heard about petalo.c ? It was a user-space very simple program that made
Linux boxes crash so that they have to be rebooted. Depending on the exact
kernel version it was possible to use kernel debug keys (just to sync and
boot)
or not. Anyway it was patched quickly (still I think there are lots of
machine
running unpatched kernels, since Linux sysadms do not like to update to keep
the stupid uptime high), just because the author (whom I know, by the way)
sent
it to the kernel list. The fact that you have not heard about it means
either that
you are using Linux too recently, or that if you had been a sysadm on that
days,
your users could have broken down your system witout root rights.

   If you are interested in the code, just take a look at Google or at the
Linux
kernel list archives. It was a very short multithreaded malloc() code. By
those
times, Linux advocates and users were already claiming that Linux was
perfect.

 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by Johan Lindquis » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 11:20:20


Fri, 15 Mar 2002 at 09:18 GMT, peering quizzically at his shoes,



>> But in Linux? NOW, IF IT EXISTED, ONE OF OUR HELPFUL "KEEP THEM
>> HONEST" WINVOCATES WOULD HAVE POSTED IT. Where is it? Where is the
>> code that I can run as a non-priveleged user that will bring down
>> my entire box? And, if it is found, how long before it is patched
>> and goes away forever? I'd almost love to see the code just to see
>> how quickly the patch follows.

>    Okay, you seem to believe that Linux is the perfection made OS.
> Have you ever heard about petalo.c ? It was a user-space very simple
> program that made

My, the hostility.

Quote:> Linux boxes crash so that they have to be rebooted. Depending on
> the exact kernel version it was possible to use kernel debug keys
> (just to sync and boot) or not. Anyway it was patched quickly (still
> I think there are lots of machine running unpatched kernels, since
> Linux sysadms do not like to update to keep the stupid uptime high),
> just because the author (whom I know, by the way) sent

Not many linux users and admins like to run the very first version
of a major kernel number (this affected 2.4.0 and 2.4.1, which I'm
sure you are aware of since you know the author), and the ones who do
generally update it as soon as the next one comes out.

Quote:> it to the kernel list. The fact that you have not heard about it
> means either that you are using Linux too recently, or that if you
> had been a sysadm on that days, your users could have broken down
> your system witout root rights.

I've been using linux on and off since some time in 1993, and I must
confess I never heard about this one until now. Then again, I seldom
go for a new kernel version until it's been around for some time,
unless it's for my own, personal, workstation. I don't tend to run any
other suspicious code on that one myself.

Quote:>    If you are interested in the code, just take a look at Google or
> at the Linux kernel list archives. It was a very short multithreaded
> malloc() code. By those times, Linux advocates and users were
> already claiming that Linux was perfect.

There are very few people, even here, that actually says linux is
perfect. Now, you're done here, take your trolling elsewhere, please.

hth,

     /Johan

--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana.      Perth ---> *
  9:49am  up 12 days, 22:44,  3 users,  load average: 1.08, 1.45, 1.31
$ cat /dev/bollocks
repurpose strategic infomediaries

 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by Albert Solson » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 11:38:29


Quote:> Not many linux users and admins like to run the very first version
> of a major kernel number (this affected 2.4.0 and 2.4.1, which I'm
> sure you are aware of since you know the author), and the ones who do
> generally update it as soon as the next one comes out.

   Yeah yeah excuses. IIRC it crashed 2.2.x too. I find here a
contradiction :

   1) Linux software is not 1.0 until it is rock solid.
   2) Don't use 1.0 versions because they are not good.

   Why shouldn't you run 2.4.0 ? Was it named so before it was
ready ? Why ? I thought Linux cared about stability.

Quote:> I've been using linux on and off since some time in 1993, and I must
> confess I never heard about this one until now. Then again, I seldom
> go for a new kernel version until it's been around for some time,
> unless it's for my own, personal, workstation. I don't tend to run any
> other suspicious code on that one myself.

   Okay, but when you talk about Windows, you always suppose that
people do that, would you do it even under Windows ?

Quote:> There are very few people, even here, that actually says linux is
> perfect. Now, you're done here, take your trolling elsewhere, please.

   Define trolling since I was giving a real example.
 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by freefa » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 11:42:45




Quote:>If even five minutes for a reboot is five minutes too much -- you need
>Linux.  

When you examine all the machines in a net block hosting the
distributors home page, Windows 2000 leads by almost 100 days.  In
fact the Microsoft net block has 15 machines with average uptimes
better than the best performed machines in the net blocks hosting the
Debian, Suse and RedHat Linux home pages.

Windows 2000
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/hosted?netname=MICROSOFT,131.107.0.0,13...
Sites with longest running systems at Microsoft Corporation
Microsoft Corporation One Redmond Way Redmond, WA 98052 US:
1 www.ncompass.com 381 397 397 Windows 2000 Microsoft-IIS/5.0

Debian Linux
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/hosted?netname=NETBLK-DANDELION-C,198.1...
Sites with longest running systems at Dandelion Digital
Dandelion Digital 930 Tahoe Blvd. #802-546 Incline Village, NV 89451
US
1 tuxedo.org 293 311 311 Linux Apache/1.3.9 (Unix) Debian/GNU

Suse Linux
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/hosted?netname=SUSE-DHS-NET,213.95.15.0...
Sites with longest running systems at SuSE GmbH, D-90443 Nuernberg
SuSE GmbH, D-90443 Nuernberg
1 www.suselinux.com 273 297 298 Linux Apache/1.3.12 (Unix)
(SuSE/Linux) mod_ssl/2.6.5 OpenSSL/0.9.5a

RedHat Linux
Sites with longest running systems at AT&T CERFnet Redwood City
AT&T CERFnet Redwood City 3175 Spring Street Redwood City, CA 92191 US
1 www.tfewines.com 112 150 150 Linux Apache/1.3.12 (Unix)
Red-Hat-Secure/3.2 mod_gzip/1.3.19.1a

 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by Mike » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 12:35:54




>> Not many linux users and admins like to run the very first version
>> of a major kernel number (this affected 2.4.0 and 2.4.1, which I'm
>> sure you are aware of since you know the author), and the ones who do
>> generally update it as soon as the next one comes out.
>   Yeah yeah excuses. IIRC it crashed 2.2.x too. I find here a
>   contradiction :
>   1) Linux software is not 1.0 until it is rock solid.
>   2) Don't use 1.0 versions because they are not good.

It was a pretty minor bug.  It was quickly fixed.  The kernel versions
you refer to are *old* -- I'm running 2.4.19, and 2.4.17 is common.

Quote:>   Why shouldn't you run 2.4.0 ? Was it named so before it was ready ?
>   Why ? I thought Linux cared about stability.

Because it's old? :-)

I don't think anyone here's stupid enough to try to claim that linux is
perfect.  We will however claim that when bugs like these are found the
linux community quickly fixes them, hence rendering them moot points.

If you want to go on about a bug that's a year old and was fixed right
after it was discovered, feel free.  It seems to be the best you troll
types can come up with -- because any problems like this are fixed too
too quickly for you to be able to make anything of it while it's still
a current problem.

Quote:>> I've been using linux on and off since some time in 1993, and I must
>> confess I never heard about this one until now. Then again, I seldom
>> go for a new kernel version until it's been around for some time,
>> unless it's for my own, personal, workstation. I don't tend to run any
>> other suspicious code on that one myself.
>   Okay, but when you talk about Windows, you always suppose that
>   people do that, would you do it even under Windows ?

Virtually all programs for Windows are suspicious.  You don't have any
way of knowing what they *actually* do, after all. :-)

Plus if you do keep up to date with the latest kernels, then you'll be
following developments at least a bit, and find out about this problem
and ugprade.  Or just be very careful about what you run. ;-)

Quote:>> There are very few people, even here, that actually says linux is
>> perfect. Now, you're done here, take your trolling elsewhere, please.
>   Define trolling since I was giving a real example.

A really old example :-)
--
Mike.
 
 
 

Importance of Uptime

Post by Johan Lindquis » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 12:40:46


Fri, 15 Mar 2002 at 10:38 GMT, peering quizzically at his shoes,

Quote:>> Not many linux users and admins like to run the very first version
>> of a major kernel number (this affected 2.4.0 and 2.4.1, which I'm
>> sure you are aware of since you know the author), and the ones who
>> do generally update it as soon as the next one comes out.

>    Yeah yeah excuses. IIRC it crashed 2.2.x too. I find here a
> contradiction :

What you recall and what I could find by looking at the actual bug
reports seem to be contradictory as well. Would you be so kind as to
back that claim up?

Quote:> 1) Linux software is not 1.0 until it is rock solid.

This isn't a "Linux software" assumption, imo. Generally, when the
developers of /any/ software package feels that they have gotten all
of the proposed functionality into a product, and it behaves like they
intendet it to on the drawing board, they call it "version 1.0". Do
you develop any software yourself at all?

Quote:> 2) Don't use 1.0 versions because they are not good.

I never said that. The current kernel is, in fact, version 2.4.

Quote:>    Why shouldn't you run 2.4.0 ? Was it named so before it was ready
> ? Why ? I thought Linux cared about stability.

The .0 is certainly not regarded as a "stable" release. The seasoned
linux users will wait until some time around .9, or until they feel
the bugs have lessened sufficiently until they upgrade to a new major
version kernel. Have you even read the kernel howto, btw?

Quote:>> I've been using linux on and off since some time in 1993, and I
>> must confess I never heard about this one until now. Then again, I
>> seldom go for a new kernel version until it's been around for some
>> time, unless it's for my own, personal, workstation. I don't tend
>> to run any other suspicious code on that one myself.

>    Okay, but when you talk about Windows, you always suppose that
> people do that, would you do it even under Windows ?

No. I don't intentionally run code I don't know the purpose for. Many
peple do tho, and since many people run windows as admin since this
is the default, they can cause much damage to their systems. I am the
local admin on my windows box as well, hence I'm quite wary of what I
click on.

Quote:>> There are very few people, even here, that actually says linux
>> is perfect. Now, you're done here, take your trolling elsewhere,
>> please.

>    Define trolling since I was giving a real example.

You were giving an example of something that has been since fixed,
claiming that many people run the kernel version that it affected. You
provided no factual evidence and urged other people to look it up for
them selves in stead.

You are not comparing linux to windows, you are merely pointing out
flaws in linux and when people respond you reply by calling the
response "excuses". That is not advocacy, you are not on topic.

cheers,

     /Johan

--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana.      Perth ---> *
 11:15am  up 13 days, 10 min,  3 users,  load average: 1.23, 1.21, 1.19
$ cat /dev/bollocks
grow plug-and-play applications

 
 
 

1. Uptime rollover, How to tell real uptime?

I have a linux system running 1.2.8  gcc 2.6.3 compiled Dec 28 95
According to the var/adm/messages file it was last booted on
Jan. 2, 1996. This would put the uptime at around 800 days.

Somewhere after 460 days the uptime counter must have rolled over
as the uptime given with "w" started again with low numbers.

I know it was not rebooted as there are daemons running that I started
by hand and are not in scripts.

Is there a way to get the real uptime?

Also I plan to shut it down soon as I am getting scared of fire
hazard due to lots of dust. The internal fan went out a year ago
and I have hung another fan on the back for cooling.

Is this maybe a record uptime??
Dale
=================================================================

Phone:(916)356-5332                     I speak only for myself
=====================================================================

2. Samba and NT PDC

3. How does uptime.netcraft.com know my uptime?

4. SVGATextMode with S3-964

5. /var/log upkeep and importance

6. Just noticed something....

7. Announcement: a new history of the Net and the importance of Open Source in its evolution

8. linux and win98 mails

9. Importance of the DOC project

10. The fundamental importance of WINE for Linux

11. Importance of securing systems

12. Importance of "SuperCache" on a timeshare system ???

13. importance of tset