[opensuse-factory] Are we supposed to be moving this fast?
I've had a couple bug reports closed with WONTFIX, despite the reports being perfectly documented and diagnosed. To summarise the reasoning - "your hardware is too old or buggy, so we can't be bothered". I operate a 7x24 production environment with a few thousand customers, so I understand the reasoning with respect to aiming for an SLES release. I have also not reopened any of those bugreports. But - is it right for openSUSE to move towards an environment where only recent hardware is supported properly? The hardware I'm talking about is datacentre-level servers (Compaq mostly), up to 7 or 8 years old. I can accept that SUSE gave up on supporting Intel 486s long ago, despite these being used in production in many environments around the world, but I'm not really comfortable with openSUSE taking on a Vista-like attitude of "if your hardware isn't up-to-date, you're effed". /Per Jessen, Zürich -- ENIDAN Technologies GmbH - managed email-security. Is _your_ business under attack? http://www.spamchek.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:39:20PM +0100, Per Jessen wrote:
I've had a couple bug reports closed with WONTFIX, despite the reports being perfectly documented and diagnosed. To summarise the reasoning - "your hardware is too old or buggy, so we can't be bothered". I operate a 7x24 production environment with a few thousand customers, so I understand the reasoning with respect to aiming for an SLES release. I have also not reopened any of those bugreports.
But - is it right for openSUSE to move towards an environment where only recent hardware is supported properly? The hardware I'm talking about is datacentre-level servers (Compaq mostly), up to 7 or 8 years old.
Do you have specific bug numbers showing the hardware you are having problems with? thanks, greg k-h --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:39:20PM +0100, Per Jessen wrote:
I've had a couple bug reports closed with WONTFIX, despite the reports being perfectly documented and diagnosed. To summarise the reasoning - "your hardware is too old or buggy, so we can't be bothered". I operate a 7x24 production environment with a few thousand customers, so I understand the reasoning with respect to aiming for an SLES release. I have also not reopened any of those bugreports.
But - is it right for openSUSE to move towards an environment where only recent hardware is supported properly? The hardware I'm talking about is datacentre-level servers (Compaq mostly), up to 7 or 8 years old.
Do you have specific bug numbers showing the hardware you are having problems with?
Hi Greg, here's a couple of examples: DMI-bug: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=204147 ISA-support: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=231191 Having two graphics cards: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177621 None of these are showstoppers, there are known work-arounds - I just thought I was beginning to see a trend. I know I've got another one around to do with shared IDE IRQs and libata or something like that. I can't find it right now, but that one's more important. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- ENIDAN Technologies GmbH - managed email-security. Is _your_ business under attack? http://www.spamchek.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 09:21:43 am Per Jessen wrote:
Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:39:20PM +0100, Per Jessen wrote:
I've had a couple bug reports closed with WONTFIX, despite the reports being perfectly documented and diagnosed. To summarise the reasoning - "your hardware is too old or buggy, so we can't be bothered". I operate a 7x24 production environment with a few thousand customers, so I understand the reasoning with respect to aiming for an SLES release. I have also not reopened any of those bugreports.
But - is it right for openSUSE to move towards an environment where only recent hardware is supported properly? The hardware I'm talking about is datacentre-level servers (Compaq mostly), up to 7 or 8 years old.
Do you have specific bug numbers showing the hardware you are having problems with?
Hi Greg,
here's a couple of examples:
Looks like a case where the hardware manufacturer can't be bothered anymore to fix its own BIOS, but SUSE or the kernel devs should work around the bugs in it. They usually do, but I have to say that it's not fair to SUSE. Hardware manufacturer should take care of its shit until the customer is done using it. If you're prepared to accept that the manufacturer will not do that, why not accept that SUSE can't do that either? I'd rather know that kernel devs--people with valuable knowledge--spend their time working on important stuff rather than toiling at workarounds for obscure bugs in ancient BIOSes. The bigger the generation gap between hardware and software, the harder it becomes to make it work, it's a rule. So if you really need to reinstall the OS on some old junk, it means it's time to get rid of the junk.
ISA-support: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=231191
:-( ISA support, come on! Even worse, ISA PnP, what a nightmare...
None of these are showstoppers, there are known work-arounds - I just thought I was beginning to see a trend. I know I've got another one around to do with shared IDE IRQs and libata or something like that. I can't find it right now, but that one's more important.
That might be valid. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Tuesday 2007-03-06 at 12:01 +0200, Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:
Looks like a case where the hardware manufacturer can't be bothered anymore to fix its own BIOS, but SUSE or the kernel devs should work around the bugs in it. They usually do, but I have to say that it's not fair to SUSE. Hardware manufacturer should take care of its shit until the customer is done using it. If you're prepared to accept that the manufacturer will not do that, why not accept that SUSE can't do that either? I'd rather know that kernel devs--people with valuable knowledge--spend their time working on important stuff rather than toiling at workarounds for obscure bugs in ancient BIOSes. The bigger the generation gap between hardware and software, the harder it becomes to make it work, it's a rule. So if you really need to reinstall the OS on some old junk, it means it's time to get rid of the junk.
It has always been a selling point for Linux to say that it supported older hardware, giving it a new life. And surely, Per is talking of Pentium IV class machines, those are not so old! I'd force developers to use five year old machines (minimum!), so they'd care a bit more for us... :-P Or, shall we need to have Vista class machines in order to run Linux?
ISA-support: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=231191
:-( ISA support, come on! Even worse, ISA PnP, what a nightmare...
There are quite a few high end industrial machines still using very expensive isa cards. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFF7VYqtTMYHG2NR9URAsxrAKCFIXgV5134dDUG3NCYuHNe2VVGWACbBoVi +YfFsZwfn1c4R1z9IW+CZk0= =hSVj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. wrote:
It has always been a selling point for Linux to say that it supported older hardware, giving it a new life. And surely, Per is talking of Pentium IV class machines, those are not so old!
Not quite - these are typically Pentium III Xeons, of which we have about 30 in use. They were top of the line when they were new, and a box with 4 of those will still drive a lot of data.
ISA-support: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=231191
:-( ISA support, come on! Even worse, ISA PnP, what a nightmare...
There are quite a few high end industrial machines still using very expensive isa cards.
Thanks Carlos. My point exactly. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- ENIDAN Technologies GmbH - managed email-security. Is _your_ business under attack? http://www.spamchek.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Per Jessen wrote:
There are quite a few high end industrial machines still using very expensive isa cards.
Thanks Carlos. My point exactly.
is this is so important, and given previous linux seems to work (I did not read the hole thread), can't you affort to edit yourself the code? many linux drivers where programmed because someone needed them badly. even a small participation could make the developper more aware of the problem? jdd -- http://www.dodin.net Lucien Dodin, inventeur http://lucien.dodin.net/index.shtml --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
jdd wrote:
Per Jessen wrote:
There are quite a few high end industrial machines still using very expensive isa cards.
Thanks Carlos. My point exactly.
is this is so important, and given previous linux seems to work (I did not read the hole thread), can't you affort to edit yourself the code?
Absolutely, but in this case, the bulk of ISA/PNP support seems to have been left behind. I don't understand all the details, but the HAL layer is also involved.
many linux drivers where programmed because someone needed them badly.
Like I said, these problems are not show stoppers. I just thought I had spotted a trend in openSUSE development - a trend I am not too thrilled about. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- ENIDAN Technologies GmbH - managed email-security. Is _your_ business under attack? http://www.spamchek.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 03:13:54PM +0100, Per Jessen wrote:
jdd wrote:
Per Jessen wrote:
There are quite a few high end industrial machines still using very expensive isa cards.
Thanks Carlos. My point exactly.
is this is so important, and given previous linux seems to work (I did not read the hole thread), can't you affort to edit yourself the code?
Absolutely, but in this case, the bulk of ISA/PNP support seems to have been left behind. I don't understand all the details, but the HAL layer is also involved.
All that is "involved" is the fact that HAL is not doing anything with ISA so you have to add the line to your modprobe file on your own. That's a perfictly acceptable work-around. But, if you feel this is a problem still, please contact the HAL developers and offer help with adding ISA support to it. It's not that impossible to do. And, this isn't a kernel issue, which is nice to see from my end. So, are we going too fast? Well, people with new hardware don't think so, as there is a constant pressure from them to support their new kit. But for older things, like ISA, the developers upstream simply do not even have access to it. I suggest offering them code or hardware to help change this. thanks, greg k-h --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Greg KH wrote:
All that is "involved" is the fact that HAL is not doing anything with ISA so you have to add the line to your modprobe file on your own. That's a perfictly acceptable work-around.
Absolutely.
So, are we going too fast? Well, people with new hardware don't think so, as there is a constant pressure from them to support their new kit. But for older things, like ISA, the developers upstream simply do not even have access to it. I suggest offering them code or hardware to help change this.
We can certainly offer the hardware - can you suggest someone I might want to get in touch with? Personally, I think the project is moving too fast when production hardware is being left behind. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- ENIDAN Technologies GmbH - managed email-security. Is _your_ business under attack? http://www.spamchek.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 06:37:33PM +0100, Per Jessen wrote:
Greg KH wrote:
All that is "involved" is the fact that HAL is not doing anything with ISA so you have to add the line to your modprobe file on your own. That's a perfictly acceptable work-around.
Absolutely.
So, are we going too fast? Well, people with new hardware don't think so, as there is a constant pressure from them to support their new kit. But for older things, like ISA, the developers upstream simply do not even have access to it. I suggest offering them code or hardware to help change this.
We can certainly offer the hardware - can you suggest someone I might want to get in touch with?
The HAL project is located at: http://hal.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software_2fhal I suggest you contact them.
Personally, I think the project is moving too fast when production hardware is being left behind.
Note, this is not something specific to opensuse, but to the whole Linux ecosystem. We are relying on a upstream development project here. So to single out opensuse is a bit unfair, you are going to have the same problem on gentoo or ubuntu or fedora too. thanks, greg k-h --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Greg KH wrote:
Personally, I think the project is moving too fast when production hardware is being left behind.
Note, this is not something specific to opensuse, but to the whole Linux ecosystem. We are relying on a upstream development project here.
Well, one thing that did strike me earlier - in the current kernels, you can still find support for token ring networking, something that has surely died out years ago (hasn't it?). Or support for the HPTxxxx RAID chipsets, which were popular in the late 1990s. Yet the support remains. What I don't like about what I've seen happening in openSUSE is that something was working just fine, but then suddenly no longer works with release++. When I report it, it's eventually swept under the carpet as being due to old hardware. I call it regression of functionality.
So to single out opensuse is a bit unfair, you are going to have the same problem on gentoo or ubuntu or fedora too.
Certainly - I wasn't trying to single out anything or anyone, I just happen to be using openSUSE, so this is where I turn first. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- ENIDAN Technologies GmbH - managed email-security. Is _your_ business under attack? http://www.spamchek.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:
Looks like a case where the hardware manufacturer can't be bothered anymore to fix its own BIOS, but SUSE or the kernel devs should work around the bugs in it. They usually do, but I have to say that it's not fair to SUSE.
I didn't really mean to discuss these examples. However - in this case, a change was made to openSUSE 10.x which meant this bug suddenly became a problem. Hardware manufacturers rarely support their kit with upgrades past end-of-life, but is it right for openSUSE to follow that same path?
Hardware manufacturer should take care of its shit until the customer is done using it.
Surely you're joking? Of course they'll never, ever do that.
If you're prepared to accept that the manufacturer will not do that, why not accept that SUSE can't do that either?
Well, as it happens SUSE can and did do it.
So if you really need to reinstall the OS on some old junk, it means it's time to get rid of the junk.
Unfortunately we don't have a few hundred thousand francs to invest in new kit, otherwise we would perhaps be considering it.
ISA-support: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=231191
:-( ISA support, come on! Even worse, ISA PnP, what a nightmare...
You're clearly out of touch with what happens in industry. ISA is used in millions of systems around the world. Just because it's long gone from your gamers box, doesn't mean the real world has also completely given up on it. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- ENIDAN Technologies GmbH - managed email-security. Is _your_ business under attack? http://www.spamchek.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Hi, On Tuesday, March 06, 2007 at 08:21:43, Per Jessen wrote:
Has a workaround present
ISA-support: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=231191
Here it is explained why this is not possible that easily. Because libzypp depends on hal to identify hardware that is present (to select software that fits) and hal does not know about ISA/PnP.
Having two graphics cards: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177621
Has also a workaround.
None of these are showstoppers, there are known work-arounds - I just thought I was beginning to see a trend.
I dont understand your abstraction that the trend is to make older hardware unsupported. The OS runs fine on this hardware. You "just" need to use the workarounds. What you are asking to do is not to support older hardware but to fix inconveniences with it. That is what people are refusing and that is perfectly fine imho. Henne -- Henne Vogelsang, Teamlead Core Services http://www.opensuse.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Henne Vogelsang wrote:
I dont understand your abstraction that the trend is to make older hardware unsupported. The OS runs fine on this hardware. You "just" need to use the workarounds.
Well, the workarounds are band-aids for lack of support in openSUSE that used to be there. I don't mind the workarounds, like I said to begin with.
What you are asking to do is not to support older hardware but to fix inconveniences with it. That is what people are refusing and that is perfectly fine imho.
But this is a new policy, AFAICT. I have only begun to see these situations in the last 12 months or so. Which is why I though I had spotted a trend. Look, I'm _not_ complaining. I'm just pointing out that older hardware seems to be losing support more quickly than it used to. If that's the openSUSE policy, so be it. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- ENIDAN Technologies GmbH - managed email-security. Is _your_ business under attack? http://www.spamchek.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
participants (6)
-
Carlos E. R. -
Greg KH -
Henne Vogelsang -
jdd -
Per Jessen -
Silviu Marin-Caea