Why is Linux stable?

[Agent007]

Have searched everywhere but could'nt find an answer. Could someone pls elaborate on this? I'm using WinXP and Redhat 7.2...When doing simple stuff like changing seettings or opening multiple Netscape Windows etc, Linux dumps core. Also some errors like the signal got killed etc, do pop around. What does one mean when they say that Linux is stable? In WinXP, I havent had any BSOD's till now, runs OK. Is there something that would make Linux more stable on my system? The other day, the power failed and system rebooted instantly, Gnome got fully corrupt and file system got screwed. This happened on an ext3 filesytem, though its got journaling and all..On the other hand in Windows, nothing gets corrupt and scandisk runs without complications.

note:-Have recently installed 7.2 and there are no extra services running in the background. Have tried KDE and Gnome, still there are core dumps.

thanks,
007

Spsyem Specs:-
AMD Athlon@600Mhz
256MB SDRAM
16MB Riva TNT graphics

[voidmain]

I don't know what to tell you. I've got a RedHat 7.0 machine out on a T1 that serves as a web server for over 20 domains, mail server for over 50 users, a DNS server, streaming audio/video server, an IDS system, many databases, backup server, and much more. It was up for nearly 500 days straight until an extended power outage longer than the UPS batteries would hold. When the power came back on it now has been up for 56 days. That's only one single time it was down due to a lengthy power outage since it was installed.  In fact all of my experiences with Linux have been like that.  If that's not stability I don't know what is...

[voidmain]

Hmmm, don't do anything with it?  I am constantly changing the configuration, adding applications, upgrading applications, using it, in fact many people are using it for many things...  And this system was not "tailored" for Linux.  It's an old Compaq server we bought for $100.  Wonder how good XP would run on it?

And then we have a couple of old Sparc 20 boxes with good uptimes running Linux.  Wonder how XP will run on those? Answer, it wont.

[ August 07, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]

[Calum]

but why is his linux not stable?

hey, what's the exact hardware spec on that machine for example?

[choasforages]

yeah, hardware problems, i have a 60mhz dell, that runs debian potateo, it hasn't crashed yet, now my main system, x loses control once everythree days, and yes, it is made from hardware i found in a trashcan.

[voidmain]

Well, it's hard to say what his problems are without more detailed descriptions.  He said "Linux dumps core".  Well, I believe he meant the applications dumped core. I couldn't tell by his description if he only had a problem with one or more applications or if the entire system stopped (didn't sound like that was happening). He could look at the core dumps and possibly get a clue as the what is causing the problem. He could look in the system logs and possibly find problem areas (/var/log/messages and /var/log/boot.log). Dunno, never had any problems like that in RedHat 7.2 on any machine...

[ August 07, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]

[Tonerman]

I think someone's getting the OS.. and the programs running on the OS confused.....  Linux is stable.. I've been ..torturing my machine with all my puttering about learning what this button and that comman does.. and configuring stuff.. like sound(Linux has superior sound quality than my 98 machine.. and it's using a shitty 16 bit sound card.. I think).. anyhoo..
My linux box hasn't crashed.... nothing big. I've had a few problems.. but.. they were my fault..

That is the thing.. when things go wrong on Linux.. it's more than likely your fault.... on Windows.. it's random... might as well ask Loki(norse god of mischief) if he did it...

[lazygamer]

Well if 1 or 2 out of 1000 wind0ze boxes are highly stable, then it's likely that 1 or 2 out of 100000 Linux boxes are cursed to instability.

If you want the problem solved 007, perhaps mention things like....

1)Have you ever tweaked your bios for reasons other then getting a piece of hardware functioning? Reasons like stability, performance etc.

2)What is your history of stability with wind0ze? Surely it crashes once in awhile or gives some totally gay error.

3)Have you tried clearing off Redhat and re-installing it?

4)What about clearing off Redhat, and then trying out a different distro? Perhaps Mandrake might be an idea, maybe more "powerful" distros are easier to mess up during installation or tweaking.

5)You don't have wind0ze and Linux on the EXACT same partition do you?

6)Has your Linux been like this the moment you installed it? If not what did you do, regardless of significance, just before the problems appeared?

These questions I asked you are just common sense questions from someone who has yet to touch Linux, chances are one of the more experinced people here could grill you with much better questions.  

[ August 08, 2002: Message edited by: lazygamer ]

[Agent007]

lazygamer,

1)No, the bios is not tweaked, anyway even if it were tweaked, would that have a negative impact on Linux? Why and how?

2)No man, Windows hasn't hung on me, during shutdown yes, but not otherwise. Everyweekend I run a regcleaner, clean out the junk etc, so it runs OK

3)I noticed the kill signals and in verison 7.1 and 7.2, they dont pop up every now and then, but yeah suddenly KDE will spit it out,when I change some settings in the control panel etc.

4)Don't wanna switch to Mandrake since everyone is on Redhat. Have to answer Redhat certs so....it's better if I stick to it.

5) WinXP is on the primary disc and Redhat on the secondary.

6) Havent done any major system changes...


PS:-Dosen't anyone here ever receive kill signal errors? If yes, then I really have some digging to do.


thanks!
007

[ August 08, 2002: Message edited by: Agent007 ]

[voidmain]

Could you describe in more detail exactly the events leading up to it and exactly the message that pops up and what application it is associated with?

I think you are seeing a KDE application crash but I am not sure without more details.  I occasionally (not often) have Konqueror crash on me if I try and load something it doesn't like but I just fire it back up and press on if it does. But I am now on RedHat 7.3 which uses KDE 3.x.  You would still be on KDE 2.2.  I don't recall if I had any problems with any KDE apps on the older version.

[choasforages]

iv seen kde crash a few times. the only good thing is that i deostn' take the whole system with it

[lazygamer]

My theory is that when running wind0ze, server systems without massive loads, or idleing systems(no activity) are more reliable.

The standard user is always opening and closing opening and closing etc.
He's multitasking the shit out of his comp, installing a game well surfing the net and listening to winamp. And when you actually play a game, HOLY SHIT! A shockwave of intensity hits your poor computer!

Summary? It's not just RAM and CPU usage. The more dynamic, erratic, and variable your activities are, the more error prone windows becomes. A server stays in one program the whole time, not having to randomly generate data and check all sorts of shit every second(like a high end computer game?).

[choasforages]

he has a point, and when playing games and shit, there are more libarys that are in use that might have a bug. apache very stable on my systems, and thats with setiathome running. but as soon as i turn setiathome off and the desktop on, i have problems only on my main computer

[Agent007]

Does this mean that in terms of home use, Windows will take more bashing than Linux? Also, r server systems actually less loaded? I mean a home user does 100's of things that a server dosent.

thanks and rgds,
007


 

quote:Originally posted by lazygamer:
My theory is that when running wind0ze, server systems without massive loads, or idleing systems(no activity) are more reliable.

The standard user is always opening and closing opening and closing etc.
He's multitasking the shit out of his comp, installing a game well surfing the net and listening to winamp. And when you actually play a game, HOLY SHIT! A shockwave of intensity hits your poor computer!

Summary? It's not just RAM and CPU usage. The more dynamic, erratic, and variable your activities are, the more error prone windows becomes. A server stays in one program the whole time, not having to randomly generate data and check all sorts of shit every second(like a high end computer game?).