Anyone can play guitar...or hack the Linux kernel

Radiohead's first album contains the song, "Anyone can play guitar." Perhaps their next album should include "Anyone can hack the Linux kernel."

Well, perhaps not anyone, but navigating kernel development just got easier thanks to the Linux Foundation's publication of a guide to Linux kernel development. I don't think this means that I'm going to become the Linux kernel's top contributor anytime soon (unless, of course, they start accepting blog entries as code submissions), but it hopefully will make Linux kernel development easier to understand.

It's more of a cultural and process guide than anything else, but that's often where companies stumble in trying to navigate Linux kernel development. According to the guide, which was posted less than two weeks ago:

With the growth of Linux has come an increase in the number of developers (and companies) wishing to participate in its development...One of the most compelling features of Linux is that it is accessible to these developers; anybody with the requisite skills can improve Linux and influence the direction of its development. Proprietary products cannot offer this kind of openness, which is a characteristic of the free software process. But, if anything, the kernel is even more open than most other free software projects. A typical three-month kernel development cycle can involve over 1,000 developers working for more than 100 different companies (or for no company at all).

Working with the kernel development community is not especially hard. But, that notwithstanding, many potential contributors have experienced difficulties when trying to do kernel work. The kernel community has evolved its own distinct ways of operating that allow it to function smoothly (and produce a high-quality product) in an environment where thousands of lines of code are being changed every day...A developer who does not understand the kernel community's ways (or, worse, who tries to flout or circumvent them) will have a frustrating experience in store.

It is hoped that those who read this document will be able to avoid that frustrating experience...The development community is always in need of developers who will help to make the kernel better; the following text should help you--or those who work for you--join our community.

With the Linux Foundation's document as a guide, you, too, can be an Alan Cox or Linus Torvalds--or at least, pretend to be.

[benjaminstraight]

Ok. Who wants to hack kernal?

[The_Decider]

Lots of people, most notably real programmers(as opposed to the API monkeys).

[Pishkado]

Anyone who's qualified to even think about hacking the Linux (or any other) kernel would know how to spell it.

[idreamincode]

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

[felgercarbnaysay]

Exactly. All this Open Source Linux nonsense misses the real point. Most people don't want to bother with operating systems at all. The best operating system is the one you don't even have to think about. That's why I use OS X I don't need the source, I don't care. It works. I'm not at the mercy of a "community" of arrogant long-haired bearded geeks who don't bathe. I have a real company behind the product. Same can be said of Solaris. Of all Unix variants, Linux is the least robust and stable for a commercial or consumer type customer. If you're doing high-performance scientific computing with racks full of boxes it's perfect, but the rest of the world needs a product written and maintained by professionals. Linux is an operating system designed by "committee". A total train wreck from a commercial standpoint.

[The_Decider]

You do realize that billions are invested in open source and Linux every year don't you?

You do realize that big companies develop and support Linux don't you?

You are at the mercy of a very closed company. You get what they offer you or you have to go elsewhere. OSS allows development of a missing feature on an otherwise solid product by anyone if the company that you got it from is not interested. I am sure you can't understand that either, since you are a troll.

Every OS has a central development team(committee), you aren't making much sense here. I guarantee you that fewer people make decisions on the Linux kernel than OSX or Windows.

[Clarious]

Most people don't want to doesn't mean no one want to mess with the kernel, and this guide is going to help those people. Also, I think linux is stable enough, if you say that it is not as robust or stable, please show your proof.

[dk_]

Completely absurd. "The best operating system is the one you don't even have to think about"?? I assume you are also too happy to be blithely ignorant when that operating system you don't want to think about shares all your private and personal details with it's manufacturer or their business partners. I assume you are quite happy to allow anyone to do your thinking for you. I have tried for years to use OS X. Every time I have been forced to give up on it not because it's not well designed but because it is only well designed for someone who cannot think for them self. I need an operating system that allows me to use it in a powerful way, not a dumbed-down and overly-simplistic one.
I also have to question your comment about Linux being a "total train wreck from a commercial standpoint". That should actually be it's strongest point. Do you actually want to rely on an operating system that is completely controlled by a commercial entity? I guess because Windows was a "commercial" success, you would argue that it is better even though it has such obvious flaws in the design? Look at the history of technical failures in every OS - commercial or not. At least with Linux, the capability to do something is in my hands, not restricted by the whims of a corporation.

[ZUrlocker]

Anyone can play guitar? That's excellent news, because I've been playing for years and I still suck! ;-)

Actually, I do believe it's true, but it takes practice. Lots and lots of practice.

No doubt the same is true when it comes to writing code.

--Zack
http://www.guitarvibe.com