DE version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
59% Positive
Analyzed from 1381 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#kernel#driver#linux#drivers#still#mouse#bus#isa#https#code

Discussion (51 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
Some of this hardware likely has exactly zero users because the material it's made from can't possibly have survived. Look at the cord on the mouse in the photo: you might be able to plug it in, but I wouldn't bet money signal can still make it down the wire.
However, it would be hard pressed to find a machine with ISA slots with enough resources to run Linux 7.1 acceptably.
For $1100 or so you, too, could have a 4th generation Core i3 machine. https://www.rampcsystems.com/product/2-isa-slot
Or maybe you need 4 PCI and 9 ISA for some reason. DuroPC’s got you, if you can drop $1800 on a system with the same generation of processor. https://duropc.com/product/r810-4p9i-4
Survivorship bias. We built a lot of crap stuff in the 80s, too. Most stuff built in the 80s is probably in landfills now.
Plastics and rubbers tend to not survive well a lot of the time just because of the chemistry. There's really no way around plastic embrittlement and rubber decomposing. You can prolong it with the right storage conditions, but those molecules are gonna break down sooner or later.
Isn't Linux planning to do the same?
I believe userspace drivers are much more powerful and easy to build than 10 years ago, but it is not from a requirement from the kernel.
Who knows, maybe we will get a smaller (instead of bigger) kernel in 10-20 years
There was a very interesting point when people who were creating Rust interfaces were asking hard questions about ownerships and lifetimes in driver interfaces from the C linux maintainers and they didn't really care to answer (just wanted to wish Rust away).
Now with AI these questions are getting practical. Fortunately big companies have big stake in keeping linux secure, so I'm not worried about it being addressed at least.
Hasn't windows (nt lineage) moved solidly in the opposite direction? Used to be you could reload/restart the video card ("GPU") driver if the driver crashed?
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/d... https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/d...
I also update NVIDIA drivers regularly on Windows 11 without rebooting, though that’s install-time driver reload rather than exactly the same thing as TDR.
Same argument for any retro-tech. What hacker would spend hours/days to hack my bare-metal DOS box running Arachne + a packet driver just to mine bitcoins on a K6-2 for a couple of hours until I turn it off from the AT power switch (not button).
Linux only ships with a tiny sub-set of the drivers in the source tree.
https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/9697...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_mouse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industry_Standard_Architecture
Guess I’ll be porting dahdi to netbsd soon lol.
Tbf, I get why Linux is dropping all this stuff. I wouldn’t mind becoming a maintainer of smaller drivers myself, but I doubt I have the skill level.
I wonder how OpenBSD's careful code quality and hygiene (maybe there's a better word) has affected its vulnerability to LLM bug finding. Did their approach pay off in this case?
Now, most will say "but why, 1995 is ancient history, no such hardware exists anymore". The thing is ... should Linux get rid of what is old? I understand you have a smaller kernel when you have less code, less cost to maintain, I get it. Still, I wonder whether this should be the only allowed opinion. Would it not be better to, kind of, transition into a situation where any hardware built in the future, would be supported? So in 2050, we'd not say "damn, computers from 2026 are obsolete now". We could say "no problem, linux is forever". Everything is supported. I actually would prefer the latter than the "older than 30 years, we no longer support it".
easier said then done -- the kernel's internal interfaces aren't static, they change often. The project has never committed to stabilizing it's driver api, so every driver takes non-zero work to maintain.
I would assume computers that are still running these old ISA mouses (mice?) probably are also running an older version of linux; and if they're running a new kernel then it'll be somebodys job to port the drivers forward. There's some likelihood this will end up maintained by someone out-of-tree, which is a nice way of saying "we've sent your dog to a farm upstate..."
"Please take this linux source and patch the Bus mouse driver back in but match the new driver interface".
With code preserved in git history it's never actually "removed". It's just, disconnected.