Fuchsia is a new operating system by google built on the Zircon micro kernel (google). User application are developed with the Dart programming language (google). Zircon being MIT licensed, closed source proprietary drivers will be the norm.
Haven't looked it all but this is definitively breaking the unix philosophy. The kernel is made with distributed programming and virtualization in mind but also high performance demanding graphic applications. The user graphic api is built on top of Vulkan.
Go's channels and rust's ownership concepts are implemented in the kernel through system calls. Objects are represented by handles. When a process sends a handle to a channel, that process looses the ownership of that handle. The first process to get the handle also gets its ownership.
Usage of Dart is interesting. google probably wants a complete control on the software stack (NIH syndrome?)
It seems to advance fast, really fast. There is already a complete developing environment available.
>Are you ready for closed source drivers, user? user, you just invalidated your whole post with the very first sentence.
Adrian Hernandez
>Are you ready for closed source drivers, user? No. But least isn't full close source like Windows. Also, I hope they are reaching the diversity quotes on programing team a Windows start do doing the same.
>literally the only major company fighting unwanted OOB management
Evan Myers
>Zircon being MIT licensed, closed source proprietary drivers will be the norm. That's a non sequitur
David Miller
>new operating system >by google neither of those are true, see github.com/littlekernel/lk which jewgle simply forked and removed stuff they didn't want
Asher Rogers
the only reason for linux drivers to be open source is the enforcing of gplv2. this is not the case with the mit license.
Proprietary drivers are more common on Linux than they are on OpenBSD.
Carter Miller
there is not a single closed source driver in linux. you are probably confusing with firmwares and user land libraries.
Jordan Reyes
>no valid argument to post >pulling a stallman how brainlet are you? also, does google compensate spammers like op nicely? or do you just get app discounts on the play store?
Evan Hill
it's more than a kernel, retard
Andrew Evans
You fucking know I am. I don't care about free as in freedom garbage. Open sores trash is an abomination that only autists care about. I just want it to werk™ and give better battery life.
Benjamin Roberts
>in linux You mean inside the official kernel source? Of course not. But naturally that's true for any MIT/BSD licensed kernel as well.
>you can't distribute a binary of the linux without providing the source code. If I modify Linux itself. However I don't have to. I can ship my proprietary driver as an external kernel module. Just look at Android phones, most of the drivers are proprietary and closed source.
>no. where is the source of the sony ps4 or nintendo switch kernel? Those aren't BSD licensed kernels. They are merely based on BSD licensed kernels.
Connor Mitchell
The only Zircon I'd ever use is the Rock Zircon earphone.
Charles Phillips
>If I modify Linux itself. However I don't have to. if you keep it for yourself, no, if you distribute it, then yes, you have to.
>Just look at Android phones, most of the drivers are proprietary and closed source. that would be illegal, anything running in the kernel shall be open source.
>Those aren't BSD licensed kernels. They are merely based on BSD licensed kernels. do you even have the least knowledge of what you are talking about? this is what the bsd licence says
Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
you can't remove the bsd licence.
Cameron Anderson
>that would be illegal, anything running in the kernel shall be open source. This is plain wrong.
Brayden Harris
>if you keep it for yourself, no, if you distribute it, then yes, you have to. I don't modify kernel at all. What you don't understand about it? Have you never ever used a proprietary driver with Linux, like for example nvidia drivers?
>that would be illegal, anything running in the kernel shall be open source. Nope.
>you can't remove the bsd licence. From the original parts. But the modifications I add can be licensed however I want. Resulting in a dual-licensed kernel.
Chase Roberts
dumb gnuposters itt
Zachary Wright
>I don't modify kernel at all. What you don't understand about it? linux is the kernel and only the kernel. linux is not an operating system on its own. you are confusing with gnu+linux, android, ...
>Have you never ever used a proprietary driver with Linux, like for example nvidia drivers? the driver is open source but the implementation of opengl in the userland is not.
>From the original parts. But the modifications I add can be licensed however I want. Resulting in a dual-licensed kernel. and this is exactly why fuchsia will have closed drivers contrary to linux. thanks for sustaining my point.
firmware is not code, it's data uploaded to a device for executing it. it's not being run by kernel.
Luke Garcia
There's literally nothing wrong with closed source drivers because otherwise companies could reveal critical IP of their products to competitors.
Shoot me. I'm a red blooded capitalist.
Brayden Myers
>linux is the kernel and only the kernel. And I'm talking about the kernel you retard. You can add additional kernel modules without modifying the kernel source at all.
>the driver is open sourc No it's not
>and this is exactly why fuchsia will have closed drivers contrary to linux Except Linux has a fuck ton of closed source drivers.
Aaron Long
>firmware is not code, it's data Oh boy.
Anthony Baker
>You can add additional kernel modules without modifying the kernel source at all. you shall provide the source or you are breaking the gplv2 licens
>Except Linux has a fuck ton of closed source drivers. would you please name a few?
firmware not being executed by the kernel and not even by the CPU, it is not considered as code
Oliver Miller
>you shall provide the source or you are breaking the gplv2 licens >read this from Linus Torvalds >So being a module is not a sign of not being a derived work. It's just one sign that _maybe_ it might have other arguments for why it isn't derived. lol ok
Jack Ortiz
>yarchive.net/comp/linux/gpl_modules.html >a binary module CAN be construed as a derived work in some cases but doesn't have to be Again proprietary Linux modules are possible. And plenty of them _EXIST_.
>would you please name a few? The GPU, VPU, and GSM module driver of your Android phone.
Jonathan Roberts
>And plenty of them _EXIST_. you are repeating this but still haven't gave a single example.
>The GPU, VPU, and GSM module driver of your Android phone. they are open source. be more specific.
Joseph Barnes
>ugly OS >ugly logo >ugly name >google literally poo of the OSes if google will ever force em switch to that piece of shit from android i'l just migrate to apple.
Wyatt Harris
The Arm Mali drivers, PowerVR driver, Nvidia's GPU driver, AMD's catalyst, Paragon NTFS, Broadcom STA wlan drivers, ...
Who cares, if there code is so easy to copy and steal their product then the product is shit. Sharing knowledge will help everyone and come back to the business in other open advances.
Wyatt Robinson
>This package provides the source for the NVIDIA Xorg _binary_ kernel module needed by nvidia-driver in a form suitable for use by module-assistant or kernel-package. >This package contains the _blobs_ for building kernel modules for the amd64 architecture. Building the kernel modules has been tested up to Linux 4.16.
You need a compilation step so that the module matches the current kernel ABI. That doesn't mean the whole module is open-source, only the interface to the kernel headers.
Andrew Jackson
the whole module is open source, what is not is the user land libraries (libgl.so)
Andrew King
The kernel module package even literally says "nonfree". The kernel module is not open-source.
Google realized that they can't keep a competitive edge with open source. If they have to open source all their innovations and their competitoers don't then Google is fucked. That's why they need Fuchsia. Will be like OS X where the kernel is open but all the magic that makes it the superior operating system is closed source.
Logan Adams
>would you please name a few? amdgpu-pro
Gavin Bennett
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Fuchsia is in fact, Fuchsia/Zircon or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, Fuchsia plus Zircon. Zircon is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning Fuchisa system made useful by the Zircon corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Zachary Davis
This is basically what they've already done with Android. Google builds proprietary apps (camera, video player, audio player, memos, search, calendar etc) on top of the open-source OS and now all the mainstream hardware companies either use Google's propriatory bullshit or they're forced to make their own apps to make Android at all functional.
James Hill
To people which don't understand the overall decision to create another system, I'll talk about at least one benefit to create a system that is not Linux: make software more simple and efficient. Do you really think that Linux is so great? Linux is a bloat system, POSIX is not so great as well (do you really read the WHOLE POSIX spec?).
It's important standards, it's important sometimes (SOMETIMES) compatibility. But not all this stuff defined in POSIX it's important. POSIX sucks sometimes, only GNU can be worse about being bloated.
Only users which don't touch in code can think that Linux, POSIX and GNU are entities following principles based in simplicity. Linux following Unix guidelines? This only can be a joke of Linus.
Creating custom software, maintaining and other stuff on things THAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND has a massive cost. As well, the cost to understand complex things, it's even worse.
Sometimes it's even more simple re-inventing the wheel than understand why a wheel was build with a fractal design.
Julian Myers
retard. you lost the argument. learn to accept defeat.
