Years ago, I used to do the LVM + FS dance, but after a couple of incidents I discovered it's a kind of jenga tower that's difficult to rebuild of things go really caterwumpus. Since then, I avoid LVM and have been waiting for stable RAID5/6 support in btrfs, but have come to the conclusion that it may never arrive; it seems to be either not a priority, or impossible (or exceedingly difficulty), because the years creep by with no apparent progress and the RAID warning increasingly looks as if it's written in stone.

So bcachefs is really interesting to me. But I'm getting Hans Reiser vibes from Overstreet; what is it with filesystem developers and oversized egos?

[–] freeman@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You do know Hans Reiser murdered his wife right?

It's very improbable that this guy will also murder someone despite being an asshole. You should probably get your vibes re-calibrated if it conflates murder with flame wars.

[–] sxan@midwest.social 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I do, and I was around before ReiserFS was released and watched his interactions on the LKML, and I stand by my statement: they have the same vibes over email.

[–] Orygin@sh.itjust.works 16 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Holy moly, the comments on the article are full of reactionaries shitting on Linux for having a CoC and enforcing it. Did not expect so much hate for such mundane things

[–] devfuuu@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

One thing to learn on the internet is to never ever go into the comments section of phoronix. It's the worst cesspool I've ever seen anywhere on the internet. 4chan is more civilized.

[–] refalo@programming.dev 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

One thing to learn on the internet is to never ever go into the comments section

FTFY

[–] jbk@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 2 years ago

meanwhile where are we rn lol

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It is the Phoronix forums

[–] finderscult@lemmy.ml -5 points 2 years ago

Is reactionaries the next word to get enlibbified now?

[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 16 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

For anyone else wondering, here's the text of the actual email cited as the CoC violation:

Michal, if you think crashing processes is an acceptable alternative to error handling you have no business writing kernel code.

You have been stridently arguing for one bad idea after another, and it's an insult to those of us who do give a shit about writing reliable software.

You're arguing against basic precepts of kernel programming.

Get your head examined. And get the fuck out of here with this shit.

[–] Lojcs@lemm.ee 13 points 2 years ago (2 children)

He tried to play Linus it seems

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 years ago

Linus has gotten a lot better. I'm pretty sure he is the one who wanted the CoC so that people like himself wouldn't ruin Linux.

[–] Boxscape@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 years ago

He tried to play Linus it seems

[–] 5714@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 years ago

Timeout! Timeout!

[–] RunAwayFrog@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

Blocking work instead of comms.
And being open about it.
How obnoxious!

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Lol surely Linux can't have a CoC or Linus would be out in seconds? I wonder if he gets an explicit exemption.

[–] sxan@midwest.social 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Yeah, I wonder about this.

There's being blunt, and there's abuse. Linus attacks code, not people. Maybe it's seems like a distinction without a difference, but Linus would say "stop submitting stupid patches," instead of "stop being stupid." Or maybe, "the quality of your patch is dumb" versus "you're dumb." But, I don't follow the LKML so maybe he does ad hominem attacks.

I do know he's mellowed over the years and the CoC was introduced after his daughter called him out about abusive behavior, and he seems to have listened to her. So you may be right: if the CoC had been introduced 20 years ago, maybe he'd have already been kicked out.

My final thought is that there's a bit of "rules for thee, not me." Linux can probably now survive without Linus, but he's still a guiding force and probably the foremost authority on the core kernel, and I have a hard time imagining his lieutenants kicking him out.

[–] doeknius_gloek@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

There's being blunt, and there's abuse. Linus attacks code, not people.

Maybe today, but certainly not in the past. I don't doubt that Linus always had the best intentions for the kernel, but he nevertheless told other developers they should be retroactivly aborted. It's hard for me to imagine that this version of Linus and a Linux CoC could've existed at the same time.

But I also get the impression that he did change quite a bit since then, now being blunt instead of abusive as you said. This shouldn't be inherently incompatible with a CoC.

[–] Saizaku@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 years ago

Linus has taken a break from linux development to work on his behavior and got professional help too. Be apologized for his past abusive behavior too. But yeah Linus was very much abusive in the past and I'm glad he worked on it, cause his behavior is much better today.

[–] cakeistheanswer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 years ago

Fair.

I think in asking myself why I've never really held Linus conduct against him; he's this weird 1:1 situation.

He's unfortunately tasked with stewarding a project that runs the planets tech and it's his name on the tin. Which whether he likes it or not at this point, makes his identity wrapped up in the quality of the project. I absolutely don't condone the behavior, but I can understand how people handing you shit sandwiches becomes a personal attack of it's own over time.

It's probably a lesson we'll refuse to learn about not doing this single leader thing again. Time and insularity tend to make bigger assholes of us all.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev -4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Linus attacks code, not people.

If I say "your code is garbage" would you really say I'm not attacking you? I don't think most people would accept that. The CoC mentions being welcoming, inclusive, respectful, empathetic, not insulting or attacking people or being unprofessional. Linus violates all of those! Of the 10 bullet points there he violates 6 of them!!

IMO this is a big issue with CoCs. They give cowardly justification for arbitrary dictatorial actions. It's much better to admit that it's a dictatorship.

I agree with the rest of your comment - it's clearly worth putting up with his arseholery given how important to the project he is.

[–] sxan@midwest.social 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I do think there's a difference. It's an established communication rule: criticize the behavior, not the individual. But, I don't disagree that Linus is an abrasive personality, because he is.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Yes that is a good rule but the problem is he doesn't just respectfully criticise behaviour, he rudely attacks it. "This code doesn't meet the standards we require" is ok. "Your code is garbage. Again!" is absolutely not.

Imagine if you said that at work. That's a trip to HR anywhere I've worked.

[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago

I agree, but if you look at the specific email linked, it very clearly crosses the line into direct abuse, whereas most of Linus's rants do exist in a slightly greyer area (even if they'd be grounds for a discussion with HR at an actual company).

[–] sxan@midwest.social 2 points 2 years ago

Completely agree. I guess it's a perk of being Benevolent(?) Dictator for Life.

[–] refalo@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago

I've always said CoCs are often just a false flag used to handwave dictatorship behavior away while hiding behind colorful interpretations of subjective terminology.