Fuck dude, we need an alternative to the Linux Foundation that actually focuses on Linux itself, not every single project that somehow runs on Linux. The linux kernel is a pain to join as a newbie, it’s underfunded (2% of all the Linux Foundation’s funding goes to the Linux kernel), the development cycle and tooling is outdated, the major language © is a security risk, the maintainers are turning old and gray which brings with it the typical resistance against change, and so many other things.
I don’t know if a fork is needed with a new org surrounding it that focuses 100% on the kernel, or if something else has to happen, but the Linux foundation wasting money on shit like AI and endorsing Chromium sounds an awful lot like Mozilla. Mozilla lost its way a long time ago and the Linux Foundation might be going the same way too.
The Linux kernel is just fine. C is in fact not a “security risk” and the tooling works fine for what it is.
I agree the Linux kernel is just fine. But that’s only because despite the security risks of C, there’s no viable alternative kernel.
But development doesn’t stand still, so either Linux catches up, or gets replaced when a viable alternative arrives. Thankfully Linus sees the problem, so they’re working to make the kernel viable a while longer, but I also agree with the person you replied to that this work could definitely use a bit more help.
There are no security risks with C when you write good code. The reason we are seeing a lot of security vulnerabilities is because prior to about 10 years ago security wasn’t considered that important.
I’m not saying Rust is bad. (It is generally good) The thing to remember is that Rust also can have security issues. What we need is skilled programmers who understand security.
The corporitization of linux continues. I jumped to BSD. Just linux at work now.
Is BSD moving to Rust and can one contribute with something else than a mailing list?
Good questions. I don’t know, but it’s unlikely that Rust will be included in the base system anytime soon. It is of course available as a package.
I had a look at NetBSD and FreeBSD: I don’t think they are in a better position than linux honestly. NetBSD still uses CVS and mailinglists for contributing.
NetBSD even starts with this
An addition or change to the existing source code is a somewhat trickier affair and depends a lot on how far out of date you are with the current state of FreeBSD development.
Both might be even be worse than linux in terms of ease of contributions…
I really dont support people hating on opensource devs/organisations but i think they deserve some hate for this.
Are there any statistics on which projects the Linux Foundation spends how much on?
Their annual report for 2024 only lists “Project Support” with 64% ($193,704,610) of its expenses but doesn’t go into details which projects are supported by how much.
Soon, Linux Foundation would be the joke that FSF is, but with capitalist twist.
please don’t insult the FSF like that by comparing it to the LF…
The FSF might be unpragmatic and (thus) often horribly out of date, but it’s neither opportunistic nor engaged in corporate bootlickery.
At some times it can even be dogmatic, but you can at least mostly depend on it keepig it’s spine and vision!
(even if I partially disagree with it, as it’s doctrine does not take political economy — and thus the root problem that is capitalism — into account)They might have pure motives but I have to wonder just how useful that is realistically. The rest of the world does not seem keen on following in their spirit.
Why chromium?
Google pays the Linux Foundation a LOT of money.
It is the industry standard. Realisticly there isn’t anything else. You can’t easily decouple Gecko and Firefox plus most companies don’t want to rely on Mozilla.
Google sucks sometimes but at least they made Chromium into something modular and embeddable.
chromium is not and never has been open source
Chromium is open source
Chrome is not.
Isn’t that objectively a false statement?
no; it’s not open source; it’s closed source by google given window dressing to appear open source.
Are you sure you’re not thinking of Google Chrome, which is a proprietary soft fork of Chromium?
deleted by creator
I don’t think you understand what “open source” means then?
To put it simply: a programme using a license that guarantees certain freedoms.
Chromium uses such a license: the 3-Clause BSD license
Can you explain further? I’ve never looked into this before, but I can seemingly find chromium’s source code on github, and on Google’s chromium site
One could argue that the BSD licence the chromium code is under has disadvantages in comparison to GPL, but saying outright “not open source” is just utter nonsense.
The queen of England isn’t dead and Elvis just went home.
