A fork() in the road

Get in the >>>/oven/ Winkike
t. Zig Forums

No. We are definitely not the same.

$ cat your_opinion > /dev/null

(You) didn't even read the post. Not everything microsoft does is bad. They seem to have a point, if you can't see that, you're just stupid.
I'm not defending Microsoft nor Windows here, I have Richard Stallman and free software in my heart.

Unfortunately this. The first time I came here there was RMS on the sticky and it seemd to be a great place, but then there were only
Nothing about real tech. Did something happen, or I just was lucky enough to come here, when there were no so maly LARPers?

UNIX braindamage
UNIX braindamage

Lol what a Unix weenie.
You belive in Unix without any doubt, like it was your religion. The truth is Unix isn't perfect. There are cool things about it, like for example minimalistic programs working together, but things like /bin/, /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin, or that everything is a file are retarded - especially the first one. Nothing is perfect, if you can't stand constructive criticism, it means you don't even know why do you love Unix so much.
Not retarded people use criticism to improve themselves and their work.
Example:
gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd/critique.html

No shit. If this was the argument then fair play, but that is not the OPs claim. OP was postulating facile arguments of "Unix BTFO" and directly implying "Unix = retardation", which is objectively nonsense.

This is stage 3 braindamage. Most likely terminal.

He's right you know.
A lot of old unix was just hacks, this is why it's important to fix issues like this.
That being said, it just werks

What i don't understand about all this is why this aggressive and vitriol filled based posting? The paper seems fine but we come to a conclusion that yes, design of software was tied to the design of hardware and its limitations. And while the hardware changed, software opted out to be backwards compatible with many of its flaws/design decisions. So what do we do about it? Shitpost at each other? Are you or is anyone else gonna rewrite the GNU tools or the Linux kernel?

This is a tough problem and it requires discussion and probably wouldn't be solved without some major work put in by the very same tech giants that opted to continue the backwards compatibility/hack to make it work trend. You put the example of HURD there as a project that takes criticism seriously but is anyone using that kernel? Might be viable as a hobby project but not actually usable. I'm not saying HURD is bad or anything. My point is with such an offputing OP and posting style nothing is achieved. The fact is that lot of people here aren't really technically adept to talk about such stuff myself included. People who know their shit probably would be dissuaded from posting when seeing threads like this or those in the catalog. Just endless shitposting about minute stuff and badly formed OPs that seem more like opinionated rants rather than a call to discussion. You wanted a discussion right? Or just to call someone an UNIX weenie or whatever.

This trend of perpetuating 'hacks' has been happening for centuries.
e.g. with Roman roads > railway gauges > modern highways
and it will continue into quantum computing in the future.

Ok you're right, but the guy that didn't even read the post started.
And it is sometimes funny to call someone, who blindly glorifies Unix a weenie. Sorry for that, my perversion.
The Hurd was just an example. If someone is serious about their work, project, etc. they will accept criticism.

What's with all the saging?
sages negated

protip: GNU Hurd was never designed to be a kernel program. The Hurd is a multi-server platform.

Yeah some of the namecalling is expected here i agree. But i guess i just see more and more threads that just devolve into that rather than discussing the topic. Im glad you aren't purposefully starting shit. Its just the topic at hand seems really complex to me. What actual answer could one give to the current state of software and improvement of the same? Seems that most answers gravitate towards a clean slate approach which comes with many of its of difficulties, especially (in my opinion) drivers, which are their own tale of complexity/difficulty of integration.

Now this is interesting. From a shallow understanding and looking at their site "Our mission is to create a general-purpose kernel suitable for the GNU operating system, which is viable for everyday use, and gives users and programs as much control over their computing environment as possible". So would you know more about it?

...

I'm not sure where you are getting the idea of using windows from.

The title is stupid, I agree on that, but the OP is still a much better contribution than half of the stuff in the catalog, and infinitely better than the rampant stormfaggotry.

Peak reddit.

> Not knowing that >>>/oven/ has existed since 8/pol/ exists
Peak reddit.

Newfags

pose that it exists in Unix mainly because of the ease with
which fork could be implemented without changing much
else.”
Is this the design philosophy UNIX weenies praise as peak meritocracy?

Attached: 4chan_userbase.jpg (1214x403, 87.95K)

...

man 2 clone

HOLY SHIT FINALLY SOMEBODY NOTICES THIS FUCKERY.
Memory overcommitting is batshit insane (it makes it impossible to handle OOM conditions), so I disabled it on my box. Cue bulky programs like shitfox being unable to spawn subprocesses because of the fork idiocy. I thought I was the only sane person left on the planet.

You mean not being able to read the fucking post or shitposting?

based

What is a thread?
Now fuck off, back to >>>/g/ !

?

KIKE

Attached: Screenshot from 2017-08-23 18-48-06.png (259x304, 63.11K)

No. I'm angry because this shit thread is about shitposting and NOT tech.

sage negated

EMBRACE (Linux foundation)
EXTENDED (PowerShell on Linux)
I wonder what comes next

UNIX fork is another example of something that was known to be bad for almost 50 years but weenies still won't do anything about it, just like array decay, null-terminated strings, parsing hardcoded text error messages, having hundreds of copies of the same code on a computer, and the rest of that bullshit. In the 60s, it was common for multiple tasks to share one address space or share segments. What really sucks is that weenies ignore decades of good designs before and after UNIX just because they're not like UNIX.

That quote is so brain damaged that I can't even believe it. The only way this would make sense is if they were intentionally making something that sucks. That article about UNIX and C being a hoax comes to mind here.

Not only this, but it's also incompatible with segmented memory. Fork holds back systems research, but it also holds back hardware.

Ever notice how most unices, the ones that don't use MMDF,often send you half-complete messages? Ever wonder where allthose lost bits GO??But the point of this is that it really hasn't got much todo with MMDF, it has to do with unix itself. The problem,see, is that the machine you mention, MC, is only a poorlittle Microvax 3, with probably only 16Mb of memory. Which,you would think, would be perfectly adequate to run a mailerand a filesystem. And it would have been, too, except thatthe nice helpful people who brought you unix invented thisthing called the "fork", which they then proceeded to stick- um, sorry, about to get a little carried away, there.But anyway, see, by employing the great unix principle of"composable functionality", they were able to determine thateven though 99.9997 percent of the time you create a newprocess you are -going to use it to run a new program-, itwould be a Good Thing to separate the notion of creating anew process from the notion of stuffing the new program youwanted to run into its address space.Now, if you were going to do that, you might at least thinkthat you could arrange some kludge to optimize the commoncase.(1) But no, that would be -messy-, and unix is not-messy-. So, kids, the way we run a program here is to useis the "fork" system call, which takes a running program,makes a new process, and -copies (and I mean -copies-, as inmoves bits around on the disk), the entire address space ofthe old program into the new one-, followed, 99.9997 percentof the time, by the "exec" system call, which takes thenewly copied bits and -instantaneously throws them allaway-.And that's why MMDF is slow.(1) And you bloody well could, too, if you were fromCalifornia. Just forget about that for now, OK?

What exactly would the "extinguish" part even be in this context? Is Microsoft going to straight up replace the Linux kernel entirely with NT? How is that even going to work?

Why should I care about a paper that is biased in its abstract? It's obviously not partial to the conclusion as whoever wrote it was already manipulating the data to fit the contrived view.

if you're forking just to exec, then use posix_spawn instead.
if you're forking for concurrency purposes, then use threads instead
if you're forking so that you can create amusing heisenbugs that people will spend months digging into, then fork from a multithreaded application and do some work with process-wide data structures before execing.

Fuck off

I don't need to be a code monkey to see the massive conflict of interest here.

Attached: that settles it.gif (328x199, 2.39M)

It's inertia and OEM pressure, what Microsoft Research (who like most research divisions have next to nothing to do with the corporation anyway) says about Unix is completely irrelevant to Windows' success.

Its history. The Commodore 64 is still the single best-selling model of computer in history because it was arguably the first in history to market itself as a video game platform. Microsoft, who supplied Commodore with its implementation of BASIC, was obviously paying attention. Windows 95 became the most popular OS of all time when it was released despite Microsoft just barely gaining a foothold in the OEM market because it was the first OS in history marketed as a video game platform. Shit like Doom and directX were big parts of its marketing. It sounds completely retarded, but people perception of Windows as being more technically superior to Linux and UNIX probably come exclusively from this heritage. If you can't run the latest 3D graphics and AAA games people are going to see you as old-fashioned and dumb. Marketing is a very powerful thing user

Attached: woz.jpg (750x499, 198.84K)

I doubt these people are reading papers on OS research though.

based

Are you retarded? fork is absolutely horrible. The abstract is unbiased and based.

Zig Forums is younger than reddit, as you should know even if you only blew in from shitfront yesterday, and the abortion known as 8/pol/ copies reddit memes such as creating boards/subreddits for the sole purpose of making "witty" comments.
That's why your oh so interesting oven comments are peak reddit, you're parroting a reddit circlejerk.

HAHAHAHA
Listen you fucking charlatan. I started programming assembly in 2006. When I came to UNIX and saw fork() it was one of the most retarded things I've ever seen (same with pretty much all of C). I already knew how static and runtime linking and everything works coming from a windows reverse engineering setting and it still was retarded. Similar to the braindamage of any UNIX desktop system allowing stuff like ptrace to violate whatever shitty security model they were pretending to have.
On that subject, UNIX larpers won't even be able to tell you whether a fucking _file access_ will work for a given set of permissions and users/owners/uid/euid/gid/etc. UNIX centers around files as some kind of "simple abstraction" and UNIX larpers don't even have an idea how they work even at a level this high.

this. retard UNIX Larpers here have never even read a single man page. Or they just read the first sentence in the man page and none of the semantics and wonder why their shit crashes. UNIX Larpers are literally 5 year olds with no attention spam or discipline.

Papers on "OS research" are literal shit. Anyone who says "systems programming" to try and sound smart is an idiot as well. Anyone who doesn't concede that the OS and PL should be merged is most likely retarded, and all this "OS research" is just a bunch of shitty C-ABI-based OS. These papers are literally on shit like "designing" a function to get the system time, where "designing" means making a bunch of shitty hacks around C ABI, future and backward portability, "oh noes we already have this function what do do we deprecare the old one!?!?!!11", etc.

triple based

unbased and completely retarded

My point still stands. The paper is biased so whatever conclusion that it arrives at is erroneous. Keep squeezing. I am sure you will get blood from that stone eventually.

nobody sane thinks fork() is good. this is literally the way it works

and for grassroots UNIX larpers:

literally noone ever would write programs this way. if you want to start another process, you would write start_process(programB)

and this is just on a surface analysis. as the LISP weeenie posted ITT, it's full of nuances:

It was never standing, you utter retard. Read the pdf or GTFO of my thread.

Wrong. I'm not the based UNIX hater. I'm the based based poster.

its just that these modern things are much worse than the old thing. like much higher resource use and much more code to do the same thing that the old simple thing did.

they're both shit

It's not though. Read the pdf.

Dumb faggot. There is blatant bias. The paper is worthless with that bias. Eat shit.

LOOOOL
Triggered UNIX weenies are funny

Look at you. You aren't objective in your arguments. Everything is about your feels. That's why you are a faggot and a piece of shit. Now shut the fuck up.

Oh I'm sorry. I wasn't aware that we were having an objective argument.
But alright. I'll humor you. How about you start by substantiating your claim that this paper is biased?

I already did you stupid fucking faggot. Now fuck off.

Look at you. You aren't objective in your arguments. Everything is about your feels. That's why you are a faggot and a piece of shit. Now shut the fuck up.

Threads are the ones that spawn endless heisenbugs, due to the default of sharing everything. Forking only shares MAP_SHARED mmaps, so of course it has far fewer data races.

When do you set up programB? file descriptors, permissions, etc? It turns out that start_process already exists in the form of posix_spawn, which is why the authors think the transition will be easy. Unfortunately, nearly all syscalls need a start_process_mysyscall variant to emulate calling it between fork and exec, which turns a beautiful little API into a monstrosity, and negates every argument they make except for the one about scaling (someone explain that to me pl0x).
There's also a number of apis for doing this in special circumstances. eg popen, system. These use fork under the hood, because someone needs to do the dirty work.

Based based based poster

You're a huge faggot.

When will we outgrow all this Unix/Linux retardation? Is there anything than can replace it in 3-5 years?

Never. UNIX-haters are a quickly aging and dying-off minority, which was small already. So not only are there very few people who have the skills to do a good operating system, even fewer really care about making a new one and not just another UNIX copy.
There's also the problem of legacy cruft. You could probably run a SVR4 program without major issues right now on a Linux machine, which is absolutely invaluable for business.

I severely doubt that, old Unix shit is plagued with subtle portability problems.

Taking Unix advice from MS, just as bad as taking dating advice from women or clothing advice from blind men. lol

sage negated. Keep crying Unix weenie.

how is a microsoftpost not about the jews?

sage negated

...

if you negate this sage ur mum is a whore

What is this supposed to mean

(checked)
sage negated

He's a pretentious boomer with unwarranted self importance.

He is a retard attempting to conflate the dying of a UNIX-Hater mindset with the classic short story about a society of people made handicapped to promote equality

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES

Mods are kikes. Why are they deleting my posts?

Wow. Just wow.

This is fucking outrageous. Fuck the jews and everyone who let this happen.

Masons, Masons everywhere.

bump XD

UNIX weenies BTFO indeed

what's bad about this btw