Ask HN: What did Linux not do right?

Most of the things that go wrong, don't happen in the kernel. Kernel development is pretty awesome and although there is always room for improvement I can't see something revolutionizing the work done there.

You might say: Let's rewrite it in Rust to ensure memory safety - well, rust support is on the way and while I think it is a good thing, it will not fix everything.

In my opinion writing a completely new kernel would not benefit from the huge effort and experience that has gone into the current kernel - so it must be inferior in many ways for a long time.

If you ask for the things Linux needs the most "polish", in my opinion this would be mostly about the desktop and the community of hating each others work. Many projects are fighting each other instead of working together to fix things, but this also might be a good thing in terms of "competition". The things I would work at are:

  UI
  Security
  Apps

And this also is all on the way. The current version of Fedora for example shows many improvements for the daily desktop user. Wayland / Gnome is getting ready to really be acceptable and flatpak does so for apps. Only security is a bit of a todo... but it will always be.

I remember the "Linux Touchpad like Mac" article that made me believe again, that people really care... and nowadays with libinput, gnome and libinput-config, the touchpad really works... it is still hack-ish, not anywhere like macOS, but pretty good, and I'm a nitpicker on this.

1. Fix process management (lots of issues around spawning, FD inheritance, waiting for state change, hierarchy management, etc.)

2. Fix Linux's misinterpretation and broken implementation of fsync

3. Remote thread management (like CreateRemoteThread)

4. Get rid of the fundamentally-broken notion of SUID bits and grant privileges via control flow (instead of via data)

5. More handles/FDs, less IDs/paths/etc.

6. If insisting on POSIX, provide a decent implementation of POSIX async I/O

7. Better I/O model in general (including completion-based I/O) [yes, io_uring is going in this direction]

8. Revamp/remove signals

9. Set the official user/kernel boundary at the library level (like ntdll on Windows, glibc on Linux) rather than at the syscall level

10. Lots of other stuff I can't think of right now

I think the linux dev community and foss developers in general could be much more aggressive about going after government grant money. Open source software is used in everything from biomedical research to fundamental science, to industry, to defense. Somehow, these key shared resources are still run on a budget that's barely a rounding error by comparison.

I know writing grant proposals sucks and everyone wants to be having fun developing software, but if you pull in enough money initially you can pay people to write more grants and make things self sustaining in terms of funding. For how essential linux is to modern society there should be more paid people working on it full time.

Disk I/O. It's basically all blocking except the fairly recent io_uring which is much more than disk I/O and perhaps a bit daunting for "I want to write some data without starving my main thread." I wish you could use select() and poll() on regular files on disk, like you can for almost all other file descriptors.

Not the kernel, but the OS. Backwards compatibility and having GUI libraries LGPLed.

The Linux kernel has a rule not to break users, and for the most part, it is followed. This is not followed in userland where glibc and GNU GCC C++ library do break users with they accidentally do not follow the spec. GUI libraries like GTK and QT break binary and source compatibility every decade or so. Windows tries it's best to keep it and that makes people want to invest in it.

Now LGPL libraries, it is very difficult to write a self contained proprietary GUI binary on Linux. This is desirable because of the above, GUI libraries like to break compatibility every decade so you want to include your own so it can run in the future. Sublime has to write their own GUI frontend. Most proprietary developers use electron.

A solution to both is Iced, but it hasn't been out that long. Likely will try writing a small app in it later. Mit Licensed. Wayland and Vulkan support. https://github.com/iced-rs/iced

How Linux freezes under high memory usage, Mac OS and Windows both handle such situations well without requiring a hard reboot.

The concept of device drivers being within the kernel is a terrible idea. It should instead offer a stable ABI for drivers to be external and (within reason) be independent of the kernel version.

whenever I try to install software on linux I inevitably end up googling errors to find out what dependencies I'm missing. Install failed because i'm missing "python.h" header for some C dependency, let me make sure python-dev is there, okay how about libffi-dev, apt install gcc-arm* fixed it for this rando on stackoverflow? okay now the installation fails in a different way, wait a minute does this python library expect rust is already installed? wtf?

people complain about NPM but at least the dependency resolution works

I dont think Linux did wrong, but, were we to fund new kernels, distributed capabilities (likely via object capabilities) would be great. Thats a huge subject, with many avenues, but a kernel as an isolated thing seems like a less ambitious core than what we could be doing.

Controversial, but I'd probably take QUIC or http3 & try to build distributed capabilities on that. Having fast QUIC in kernel, & available to userspace would be very much "heading towards where the puck is going".

It's notable how bad Linux async i/o & others had been. Uring (its much more than io_uring these days) has totslly rewritten the rules, has been a giant leap into modernity. But it's so new! Leaning into uring style completeable syscalls would be essential.

eBPF has shown that programmability of the kernel space opens hella doors. Trying amplify this winning wpuld be great.

The past 10 years have really seen Linux grow all kinds of fast excellent capabilities, griw into itself. The above uring & ebpf examples are high examples of this. DMA-BUF has gone from up-and-comer to become the core win for much of the kernel, for how desktops & media processing are fast & good & flexible. It'll be interesting to see, but I have a hard time imagining more big boom events that push us way forward again continuing.

Not gather along one distribution with what it means to be Linux, just like every other OS.

Every disagreement leads to a new snowflake distribution, fragmenting the community.

Hence why the Year of Desktop Linux ended up being taken by a browser, a managed language runtime and running inside of VMs.

The Linux kernel is as good as it gets, in my opinion.

Desktop Linux is another story though. On one end, you have GNOME devs who try to imitate macOS without the UX design knowledge and taste, and KDE that is buggy and crashes a lot. If these teams merged they could create something that will rival Windows. I guess fragmentation and lack of good desktops it is.

Systemd should’ve been a thing since the start.

Android took the same kernel and built a massive eco system by solving the app deployment problems.

Not the kernel but deployment of binary apps is almost impossible because of a fragmented platform and distros not providing a universal set of guaranteed, ABI compatible libraries.

Per identity per origin per program security context. https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/254923/is-it-po...

If you were starting a project like that today, it'd probably be a capability-based microkernel written in Rust.

I think one of the problems was to provide only the kernel and leave implementing the userland to people building different distributions. This has led to an incredible amount of replication of work, inconsistencies and incompatibilities and IMHO was one of the reasons Linux on the desktop never caught on.

Messed the desktop experience. The level of main desktops (KDE, Gnome) compared to macOS / Windows experience is poor to the extend that I'm not sure why we have the level of fragmentation we do.

On the other hand, window managers under linux are freaking awesome (no pun intended).

Little more philosophical with less practical examples, and a bit ranty, comment incoming:

Linux did not proactively foster standards on anything beyond the kernel.

Sure many would shout "not their job!" but here we are in 2022, every disagreement in an obscure chat channel or a forum only 500 people on the planet know exists leads to a new distro, or a fork of a high-profile library, or yet another pre-built KDE/GNOME configuration claiming usability / accessibility and whatnot. Fragmentation abounds, egos are flying around. Feels like a kids club arguing with another kids club about which Transformer toys are the coolest.

Like, come on already. Agree on a common goal and start pursuing it. Moderate aggressively -- if somebody is being a dickhead just boot them out. Done. (Would have saved at least 17 people no less than 10 hours each, judging by several random encounters I witnessed some years ago.)

---

Non-exhaustive list:

- We need strong schema for cooperation between tools. A tool like `jc` that strives to parse various UNIX tools outputs and convert them to JSON shouldn't even exist yet I find it indispensable for most of my throwaway scripting or homegrown data-science needs.

- We need less copying between user space and kernel space.

- We need to start moving away from "everyting is a file" and have some standardized SQL-like interface to the OS (or any other query language that makes sense for the task; people will adapt).

- We need less Python scripts being responsible for, well, almost everything. It's collectively embarrassing and makes a ton of distros very brittle (upgrade from 2.7.X to 2.7.Y and hilarity ensues).

- We need to start bundling more things into the OS by default. People love standards and that's the (apparently inconvenient) truth. Endlessly parroting "freedom!" has gotten us nowhere as it's very clearly visible by the state of anything non-kernel related in Linux land.

---

A lot of things from the 70s and 80s still make sense today. But some no longer do and we should recognize that and start moving forward because that old way of doing things is actively hampering progress of the entire IT area.

And no I truly don't care if I get automated out of my job as a result. At one point the area has to progress further. We are in an evolutionary cul-de-sac.

---

It really does seem that non-kernel Linux work is mostly picked up by very immature people who don't seem to be professional programmers at all.

Unix style command line where "everything" is text...

> What did Linux not do right?

Linux did everything right, if you want a kernel that looks and behaves like Linux. If you want a kernel that does something differently, see the other replies in this thread. All of these things (such as a stable driver ABI) would radically change Linux, and are probably very bad ideas.

> Or, if you have enough funding to write a new kernel, what would you do differently?

I'd make an open-source kernel inspired by the best parts of Windows NT. Not a direct clone of 30+ years of legacy APIs (ReactOS), nor an emulator trying to fit the square peg of Linux into the round hole of Windows (WINE).

Linux didn't bribe government officials.

The desktop experience is still a mess. They’ve become complacent with ‘it works out of the box’ but that’s not the bar. Apple sets the bar and there’s no prize for second place. You’re on Apple or Linux or brain damaged and using Windows, but nobodies using two as their primary driver, and so one ecosystem dominates. I’m glad it’s Apple because the GNU crowd are virtue signalers first and software developers second. For all their yapping the linux desktop speaks for itself

Probably a stable driver api. It was always a challenge upgrading with offbeat hardware, and the GPUs were always a pain in the butt.

Linux' memory model is overengineered and confusing. If I were to design a new kernel neither overcommitting nor virtual memory would be enabled by default. That would make it much easier for userland processes to manage their memory.

Linux's fundamental, unsolvable problem is that it's not an operating system. Instead, it's a kernel, with a bunch of other systems stapled to it. This creates headaches both for new members ("Which distro should I use?") to users with a bit of experience ("Should I use X11 or Wayland?") to the admirable people down in the trenches ("alsa or pulseaudio?"). Linux prides itself about its flexibility, but all this does is cause long annoying conversations at every level. Vi, Vim, or NeoVim? These kinds of conversations don't happen with other OSes because other OSes are _fundamentally centralized_ in a way that the Linux community isn't and probably never will be. Right now in Windows there are essentially 2 ways to run Linux programs - VMs and WSL. If Windows used the Linux model, I can very easily imagine a dozen different ways to run Linux programs on Windows, all with their own upsides and downsides and rabid fanbases, with the consumer stuck in the middle of the intersection wondering which way to go.

This fragmentation has real downsides, too. I have an odd multimonitor setup with one vertical monitor and two horizontal monitors. I can configure this in KDE's settings, but the login shell is a separate application and needs to be fixed by googling the solution and changing some config file. I've never had a Linux distro that, when I configure the default monitor when logged in, also uses that setting when logged out. In all my years of using Windows this has never happened!

In some ways, this is one of the ways in which a company controlled project has more of a chance to succeed than a community-built open source project. They have a financial incentive to stick to one plan and do it well, rather than develop a dozen competing products and brute-force a good solution. The user-facing areas of Linux that do the best are projects like Android, Ubuntu, and Pop OS, all of which have a company that keeps them in line.

This is to say nothing of the google-centric UI of Linux. Don't know how do do something? Google the answer, sifting through multiple possibly out-of-date forum posts, or excavate through man pages to find the answer. In other operating systems, you can confidently rely on the OS helping you out, but not Linux. This behavior is often dismissed as "hand-holding". Well, I suppose I want my hand to be held then! I don't want to waste time finding the answer online, I want the OS to show me to the answer so that I can find it for myself. I can never remember the correct syntax for systemctl commands; I don't use them often enough to memorize them. So I have to look them up every time. Windows, meanwhile, has provided a GUI (that I know will exist on every Windows machine) that I can use to stop and start these things. In fact, Windows has provided a tool that I can easily use to troubleshoot the system, without having to google for commands first, that is easily accessible. Meanwhile the Linux answer is "here, learn how these dozens of commands and how these dozens of config files work; if you encounter enough problems you'll start to memorize stuff." The stench of Stockholm Syndrome is strong.

People complain about the difference between Program Files and Program Files (x86) in Windows. Well let me introduce you to the dozen different places to install an executable in Linux! Also, half of them are sim-linked to the other half in an effort to decrease confusion (they seem to have failed there).

Yes there are problems with Windows. The registry should have been an actual database, dark mode isn't os-wide, and most of the settings still haven't been corralled away from winforms into the new settings app (though you can't seriously be suggesting that Linux's "put a config file anywhere in whatever file format you like" system is better). I want to like Linux but every time I try it I end up having frustrating problems that take way longer to solve than they would on Windows.

Edit: Holy moly, sorry for the accidental essay. Hadn't realized how long this had become

Printing & Bluetooth.

It works mostly, until it fails without hints and is a mess to fix

Copying data between kernel and userspace, ie socket data handling.

Realtime audio. Audio interface makers don't even release Linux drivers. I wish the situation could improve so that I can use Linux for both work and music production.

I don't know about kernel, but from my experience I'm generally struggle with philosophy "From nerds, to nerds." Most problems require sudo this and sudo that which led to multiple new problems and overall it is not user friendly. It gets better with development and also with user experience, but it is damn hard to get into linux as noob. Also imho default values for settings are often not wisely chosen.

As professional artist I still cannot use linux for work unfortunately (no 10bit support, no professional SW compatibility, GPU drivers mess, crazy difficult settings of VM dGPU passtrough, etc.).

I'd make it a microkernel, not monolithic. This would solve the problem of the Linux kernel being bloated, thus making it easier to maintain.

it's hard b/c linux ended up crushing every commercial competitor outright. here we are asking where it went wrong. while the point of free software (presumably) is not to crush commercial competitors, i'm not mad at it.

Rewrite the kernel in Rust of course, which imho ought to happen sooner or later

Two major areas I would focus work on:

1. concurrency 2. variable naming 3. off-by-one errors

Audio

The L in ALSA stands for Linux.

CoreAudio is much better.

Tooling for webcams is very lackluster.

Linux development I think could benefit from a more coordinated and staged approach to development.

A more competitive operating system would be based on Gentoo. After all one of the most, if not, the most popular os for laptops is Chrome, or was at some time at it was based on Gentoo if I read that correctly. Correct me if I'm wrong.

To make it more friendly to users of Debian (and all it's children) I think it would be great apt commands ran transparently to compile, optimize, and install and remove software without breaking things.

Because of the time involved system vendors like Dell can make a repo for each system they offer if from top to bottom the build process is coordinated.

In between hardware and basic os design, a fully fledged desktop is desireable for new machines and I think KDE's desktop is sane enough to work well even if it does consume more memory. But everything is perfectly optimized. A new system could boot in just 7 seconds or less. There would be no snap, or weird repos you have to trust with your life with.

AppImages for apps would be fine if the system would always know where they are and how to update them.

I know basically nothing about gentoo and how to install and use it. I just know it is a major pain in the ass. But the thing is, this is the only way to make a professional operating system for the general public. Google proved this with Chrome OS.

Making everyone become a master at using portage and understanding what all these options is not needed if the blanks are filled out in advance and doing something like:

sudo apt install thunderbird sudo apt uninstall snap

Being able to do that, boot quickly, stable systems tailored by the manufacturer, its really full stack control. The Ubuntu Stack is looking really nasty recently. I hate having to rely on it.

Making a good operating system should be as easy as going to a vending machine, pressing buttons on a screen, and out pops a usb stick which is brain dead simple to install without destroying everything in your system. Perhaps a packet comes out from the machine that explains how to avoid data loss.

The vending machine would be like menus at a store. You select what kind of cpu you use and you can be as nerdy about it as you like your make and model of computer. It could be like something you would find at MicroCenter. A little kiosk that Dell would make to cook up a custom system and put it on a fast disk that some one at the store can help the elderly preinstall it.

The musicians store kiosk spits out usb drives that are preloaded with vetted software. Paid for software can be selected and the music store gets a cut of the royalty. Whatever goes on that disk just works. Can we just do?

The Game store sells USB drives that contain only one game. It has just what it needs to play a game on the system type you select.

Staging development could help improve software quality. It is always frustrating on ubuntu trying to find the latest and greatest. Wouldn't it be nice if that software was also byte code optimized? Maybe its only 10% better. But we have limited electricity and every little bit savings helps.

Quality is ensured so if your system isn't listed then too bad for you. However you could try your hand at compiling your own from a middleware distro that had a similar kiosk interface but more options and warnings of what may or may not happen with your selections. What the kiosk pops out is always 100%.

A kind of royalty system can circulate the kiosk service for different stores. System makers can get involved on the demands of stores that wish to serve up desktop systems.

There is always a demand for newer better software and if the integration is always simple, people are willing to pay for usb sticks.

Linux as an ideology is like all ideologies, they are flawed. We just want software that doesn't disrespect us. We want a clear relationship with our venders. We do not wish to be warped into a mind stealing model of business. People would use kiosk software not because the software is all organic free range GNU software. They use it because they trust it and it does what they want it to do.

UIDs rather than Windows SIDs is my bugbear. Makes a whole mess when you introduce docker into the mix.

UX

Security. They have so much ass backwards and it is the hill everyone who matters will die on. Even android with all the turd polishing they donis still a wasteland. Strawman arguments and whataboutisms are a hard drug.

No user friendly / ergonomic ways to exit vim.

I can tell you as an end-user, linux is very difficult. It does not have to be.

I am saying this as a person with a computer science degree and worked in the field for a while, although I no longer do. My point being is that I have more experience than the average user, but still think it is very, very difficult.

I could spend a lot of time learning it, and do it fine, but I just don't have the time. I have other larger issues to deal with.

I started off with MS-DOS, so I am VERY used to command lines. But I hate them now. I just cannot bear them. And for a lot of stuff, you have to string a bunch of fucking command lines together. It wouldn't be bad if I was a sysadmin and doing the same thing over and over and just automate it. However, I only usually need to do things one time, so it is a real pain to have to type these long lines of command lines, where it is easy to make a mistake when typing it in, when in windows, all I have to do is click and move an icon for one-time operations.

There's so much on linux that sure, I know how to look stuff up and do it, but it's just a pain, when these things I KNOW can be automated by someone else and put into a GUI or somewhere. Some kind of apps included in the distro.

One thing that has seems to have got better is downloading actual linux. It used to be:

Download beta Download v1.e384 Download v93d8920r4 Download v72.dist Download v.alpha

and it would go on for about 20 different versions. that sucked ass big time.

Just give me a button that says "Download"

I totally understand the purpose of putting all the versions there. But it is stupid. Just put "Download" and another button that says "Choose which version of download you want" / expert"

And most do this now, so it is great. But as recently as a few years ago, none of the distros were clear as to which one should be downloaded.

.

When it was the very last moment, very last day to use Windows 7, I decided to switch to Linux permanently. But, as I did it, I found four apps that I HAD to use, did not work on Linux. I tried to do emulation and stuff, but it just become too big of a nosebleed, because there was no button that automatically would load an emulator, that I found, and that with a bunch of other stuff, was just taking up too much of my time. I could LEARN, I know I could, but I just had no time to fuck with it anymore.

On the other hand, installing Windows 10 was "Download" and it downloaded and it worked. Nothing else had to be done. I didn't want to go to Windows 10, but I just didn't have time to mess with linux.

Linux is very difficult. I know this because I have a degree in CS, worked in tech, and was in charge of acquiring new tech, learning the new tech, and teaching the new tech to others. Learning was my job. So I know I could learn Linux, but no time, and it is too difficult, if it is difficult for me, then it is a real pain-in-the-ass for someone who has no experience at all in computer systems.

I think that linux distros should just only have complete newbies on the team to test everything and let the distro team members know what is unclear.

That's my feedback.

Not Linux, but Systemd[0] makes many people angry. Entire distros have purposefully not included it. Look at Devuan[1]

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemd

[1] https://www.devuan.org/