Linux

48446 readers

696 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

163

Are there any things in Linux that need to be started over from scratch? (lemmy.ca)

submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

274 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm curious how software can be created and evolve over time. I'm afraid that at some point, we'll realize there are issues with the software we're using that can only be remedied by massive changes or a complete rewrite.

Are there any instances of this happening? Where something is designed with a flaw that doesn't get realized until much later, necessitating scrapping the whole thing and starting from scratch?

(page 3) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (21 children)

Not really software but, personally I think the FHS could do with replacing. It feels like its got a lot of historical baggage tacked on that it could really do with shedding.

load more comments (21 replies)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (8 children)

Are there any things in Linux that need to be started over from scratch?

Yes, Linux itself! (ie the kernel). It would've been awesome if Linux were a microkernel, there's so many advantages to it like security, modularity and resilience.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Got that in performant?

load more comments (7 replies)

[–] jordanlund 4 points 7 months ago

dmesg

/jk

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (15 children)

Wayland could already do with a replacement.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

It is so much better than X

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (34 children)

Seriously, I'm not a heavy software developer that partakes in projects of that scale nor complexity but just seeing it from the outside makes me hurt. All these protocols left-right and center, surely just an actual program would be cleaner? Like they just rewrite X from scratch implementing and supporting all modern technology and using a monolithic model.

Then small projects could still survive since making a compositor would almost be trivial, no need to rewrite Wayland from scratch cause we got "Waykit" (fictional name I just thought of for this X rewrite), just import that into your project and use the API.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

I agree in the sense that Wayland adoption would have definitely gone quicker if that was the case, however in the long run this approach does make sense (otherwise you will eventually just run into the same sorts of issues X11 had).

Btw what you're describing is not that far off from the normal way of using Wayland protocols in development - you use wayland-scanner to generate C source files from the protocols, and you include those to actually "use" the protocols in your programs. Admittedly all my Wayland development experience has been "client-side", so I really don't know how complex it is to build a compositor, but dwl (minimalist Wayland compositor) is only around 3k lines of code (only slightly more than dwm (minimalist X wm)).