Linux za Sve forum

binarni je napisao/la:Sprdnjom ste napravili manevar da se ne raspravlja o onome što je Antares napisao. OK. Ja ću,kad se vratim doma, opet na svoj Linux zato što ja tako želim ali Antaresova primjedba stoji.

For those of you who don't know what an API is, it is the description of how the kernel talks within itself to get things done. It describes things like what the specific functions are that are needed to do a specific task, and how those functions are called.
For Linux, we don't have a stable internal api, and for people to wish that we would have one is just foolish. Almost two years ago, the kernel developers sat down and wrote why Linux doesn't have an in-kernel stable API and published it within the kernel in the file:
https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel ... -rc2.patch
If you have any questions please go read this file. It explains why Linux doesn't have a stable in-kernel api, and why it never will. It all goes back to the evolution thing. If we were to freeze how the kernel works internally, we would not be able to evolve in ways that we need to do so.
Here's an example that shows how this all works. The Linux USB code has been rewritten at least three times. We've done this over time in order to handle things that we didn't originally need to handle, like high speed devices, and just because we learned the problems of our first design, and to fix bugs and security issues. Each time we made changes in our api, we updated all of the kernel drivers that used the apis, so nothing would break. And we deleted the old functions as they were no longer needed, and did things wrong. Because of this, Linux now has the fastest USB bus speeds when you test out all of the different operating systems. We max out the hardware as fast as it can go, and you can do this from simple userspace programs, no fancy kernel driver work is needed.
Now Windows has also rewritten their USB stack at least 3 times, with Vista, it might be 4 times, I haven't taken a look at it yet. But each time they did a rework, and added new functions and fixed up older ones, they had to keep the old api functions around, as they have taken the stance that they can not break backward compatibility due to their stable API viewpoint. They also don't have access to the code in all of the different drivers, so they can't fix them up. So now the Windows core has all 3 sets of API functions in it, as they can't delete things. That means they maintain the old functions, and have to keep them in memory all the time, and it takes up engineering time to handle all of this extra complexity. That's their business decision to do this, and that's fine, but with Linux, we didn't make that decision, and it helps us remain a lot smaller, more stable, and more secure.
And by secure, I really mean it. A lot of times a security problem will be found in one driver, or in one core part of the kernel, and the kernel developers fix it, and then go and fix it up in all other drivers that have the same problem. Then, when the fix is released, all users of all drivers are now secure. When other operating systems don't have all of the drivers in their tree, if they fix a security problem, it's up to the individual companies to update their drivers and fix the problem too. And that rarely happens. So people who buy the device, and then use the older driver that comes in the box with the device, which is insecure. This has happened a lot recently, and really shows how having a stable api can actually hurt end users, when the original goal was to help developers.

Antares je napisao/la:to je moj način komunikacije.
meni je lakše u dvije reči "security kod" ili u tri "koji razvijaju linux" jer podrazumjevam da se zna šta mislim pa štedim riječi i tipkanje.
Nebitno je, i windows i linux imaju i prednosti i mana podjednako.,., po meni. I osobno jedan dobar windows server ne smatram imalo nesigurnijim od linuxa. 100 ljudi 100 čudi, rekao sam mišljenje i nema potrebe zadaljnjom raspravom

binarni je napisao/la:Sprdnjom ste napravili manevar da se ne raspravlja o onome što je Antares napisao. OK. Ja ću,kad se vratim doma, opet na svoj Linux zato što ja tako želim ali Antaresova primjedba stoji.

Abzeenth je napisao/la:Nije to sve baš tako jednostavno, i ako se stvarno želi ozbiljno raspravljati o tome, onda treba biti spreman jasno definirati šta se točno uspoređuje i s čim. A neozbiljna čavrljanja i nadmudrivanja bez ikakvih podataka i izvora bi se, da, mogla nazvati sprdnjom.

trzalica je napisao/la:Abzy, nakon ovoga bi te prije godinu-dvije jedan osebujan forumaš pozvao na raspravu u televizijskoj emisiji