public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@vger.timpanogas.org>
To: Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cam.ac.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jmerkey@timpanogas.org
Subject: Re: Microsoft begining to open source Windows 2000?
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 12:14:31 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010308121431.A9687@vger.timpanogas.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20010308162515.00a63a80@pop.cus.cam.ac.uk> <Pine.LNX.4.30.0103081733420.13093-100000@dax.joh.cam.ac.uk > <5.0.2.1.2.20010308174629.00a89ec0@pop.cus.cam.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20010308174629.00a89ec0@pop.cus.cam.ac.uk>; from aia21@cam.ac.uk on Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 05:53:08PM +0000

On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 05:53:08PM +0000, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> >
> >They do already license the source to a few trusted companies (Executive
> >Software used to ship modified NTFS drivers for NT 3.51 as part of
> >Diskeeper, IIRC). They are inching ever so slowly towards letting human
> >beings (cf MS drones) read their code...

Their code is tough to read due to the use of C++ constructs all through 
their architecture.  You can issue a request to some kernel component of 
NT only to have it raise a software exception that shows up somewhere else
in the kernel code.  Since they use structured excpetion handling all 
over the place, it takes a long time to make sense of just what is 
going on in large sections of their kernel.  Their architecture is 
much more flexible than Linux, but you pay the price in increased 
complexity.  The NWFS file system on W2K was an absolute nightmare
to write and debug, and I could not have done it without their source
code and David from MS helping.  

I'm more suprised they are even showing to customers.  It's so damn 
complex, most of the people they give it to won't be able to make
heads or tails of it.  Linux is a lot easier to read and follow.  The
licence they disclose it under is very strict.  

Giving a W2K customer the source to W2K isn't going to do a single one
of them any good, other than to watch some automated makefiles build 
stuff and maybe boost the customer's egos.  An average W2K customer 
lookinh at the W2K sources would be like Captain Kirk from Star Trek 
forgetting his tricorder on Rigel 7 or something -- in 100 years of so,
the natives might figure our how to make it start a fire or something.
It takes years to understand the subtle behaviors in W2K kernel 
programming, and it doesn't have the mongolian horde following of 
Linux developers.  

MS releasing W2K code to customers is pretty much a non-event in terms
of it causing some meaningful "linux-like explosion" of W2K development.

Jeff 





  reply	other threads:[~2001-03-08 18:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-03-08 16:04 Microsoft begining to open source Windows 2000? Venkatesh Ramamurthy
2001-03-08 16:21 ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-08 16:28 ` Mohammad A. Haque
2001-03-08 18:07   ` Richard B. Johnson
2001-03-08 18:32   ` Joseph Pingenot
2001-03-09 10:40   ` Graham Murray
2001-03-09 12:05     ` Jesse Pollard
2001-03-09 12:47       ` Rogier Wolff
2001-03-10  2:10         ` Jesse Pollard
2001-03-09 13:26     ` Mohammad A. Haque
2001-03-09 17:01       ` Ralf Baechle
2001-03-09 19:34         ` Mohammad A. Haque
2001-03-08 16:31 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2001-03-08 17:36   ` James A. Sutherland
2001-03-08 17:53   ` Anton Altaparmakov
2001-03-08 19:14     ` Jeff V. Merkey [this message]
2001-03-09  3:35 ` Werner Almesberger
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-03-08 21:21 Jason Venner
2001-03-08 19:40 Venkatesh Ramamurthy
2001-03-08 16:49 Wayne.Brown
2001-03-08 15:24 Jesse Pollard
2001-03-08 18:34 ` Ian Stirling
2001-03-08 20:41   ` Jesse Pollard
2001-03-08 15:01 Venkatesh Ramamurthy
2001-03-08 15:52 ` Mohammad A. Haque
2001-03-08 16:06 ` Alan Cox
2001-03-09  5:43   ` J. Dow
2001-03-09  6:34     ` Mike Galbraith
2001-03-09 11:11       ` Dr. Michael Weller
2001-03-08 19:10 ` Roeland Th. Jansen
2001-03-08 19:38 ` Lars Gaarden
2001-03-09 18:16   ` Kai Henningsen
2001-03-10  3:49     ` Steve Underwood
2001-03-11 17:23     ` Mark H. Wood

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20010308121431.A9687@vger.timpanogas.org \
    --to=jmerkey@vger.timpanogas.org \
    --cc=aia21@cam.ac.uk \
    --cc=jmerkey@timpanogas.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox