Eventually people would get tired of patching old ones, but at that point you just freeze them and have people use a VM to avoid the security holes.
Windows has compatibility mode for older windows. And it's great.
Eventually people would get tired of patching old ones, but at that point you just freeze them and have people use a VM to avoid the security holes.
Windows has compatibility mode for older windows. And it's great.
funnily enough, though, Red Hat failed with LSB, but systemd is, for better or worse, accomplishing much of the same goals, causing many of the same issues of poor extensibility and customizability.
The new trendy solution seems to just be having different tiers for devices that can't handle the full thing.
Customizability itself is, to some degree at odds with pretty much all of what the majority of users who are not hobbyists want, so I'm not sure it's the best plan to prioritize that.
On the other hand, the current solution of pretending that only Ubuntu and Red Hat exist and leaving other distros to figure out the compatibility for themselves seems to be a slight less restrictive de facto standard that works well for most.
Does that matter? If there is a stable driver that's what's important, and FreeBSD has if anything a better track record for maintaining drivers for longer, even if those drivers were originally ported from elsewhere.
> Linux is undeniably a safer, more conservative business decision than FreeBSD.
I disagree; safe and conservative is exactly what FreeBSD does better than Linux.
For example, a lot of the tricks that Proton relies on explicitly use patches to the Linux kernel to do with FUTEX_WAIT implementation, which have only been patched into mainline since 5.16 afaik, as well as bleeding edge Mesa/xorg versions, the current state of things is that it makes sense for them to base on a rolling release where they can frequently push system images with bleeding edge versions to the deck hardware.
Maybe a few years down the line it'd make more sense to base on something more stable like BSD, but things are moving very quickly in Linux+wine gaming support and it's actually helpful right now to be on experimental/unstable versions of certain things.
Bullseye is the good enough point for basically everything other than gaming on debian distros, not much you can't do with juat the bullseye repos.
Now that Valve has decided Linux gaming is a real thing, within a few years Debian will probably be good enough for that..
Not that it will stop them from constantly changing stuff in breaking ways for 3% better performance....
The only thing Sony needed from FreeBSD was x86 support and generic kernel facilities such as memory, process and IO management. Everything else they wrote themselves for their proprietary hardware and userspace.
Steam (or whoever at this point) could bring together the efforts put in static linking of Linux apps and combine it with some sort of app isolation (freebsd like "jailing"... maybe doable with lxc?) so that a game binary once linked doesn't need anything other than the kernel and the isolation keeps it from affecting other apps in case it is exploited because of vulnerabilities in statically linked parts of the binary.
This way, we could have forever running apps if that is what we want.