[flagged]
I’m gonna hazard a guess and say that I don’t think the author has any troops anywhere, let alone in Ukraine.
Spoiling Linux Kernel with "sanctioned" code
11–20 of 72 posts
Re: Spoiling Linux Kernel with "sanctioned" code
#12Re: Spoiling Linux Kernel with "sanctioned" code
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m gonna hazard a guess and say that I don’t think the author has any troops anywhere, let alone in Ukraine.
Then he should probably move out of Russia. As near as I can tell, pretty much everyone in Russia should be trying to leave at the earliest opportunity.
Re: Spoiling Linux Kernel with "sanctioned" code
#14I've been thinking lately that what underpinned the FOSS golden age was not actually decentralized VCS and high-quality forges, nor even ZIRP, but rather peacetime. After a period of branches and patchsets, full national hard forks are going to become de rigeur, and linux-derived OSes across the world are going to bloom necessarily, as we no longer have the kind of ambient trust required to collaborate across borders…
The globalised, hyper-centralised world is a bit boring, tbh.
Re: Spoiling Linux Kernel with "sanctioned" code
#15I've been thinking lately that what underpinned the FOSS golden age was not actually decentralized VCS and high-quality forges, nor even ZIRP, but rather peacetime. After a period of branches and patchsets, full national hard forks are going to become de rigeur, and linux-derived OSes across the world are going to bloom necessarily, as we no longer have the kind of ambient trust required to collaborate across borders…
This is a great thing for innovation though? Nations/blocs protecting their tech interests will result in more jobs to go round in the industry, more unique ideas, and less centalisation, surely? The globalised, hyper-centralised world is a bit boring, tbh.
Re: Spoiling Linux Kernel with "sanctioned" code
#16Re: Spoiling Linux Kernel with "sanctioned" code
#17Yeah, it sucks. > This adds ~1ms latency per transfer cycle for rapid bidirectional communication which leads to half the USB 1.1 speed for smaller packets at best. Still, I don't think this patch should be applied /for everyone/. Maybe compile out-of-tree and load as a kernel module, if possible?
Re: Spoiling Linux Kernel with "sanctioned" code
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then he should probably move out of Russia. As near as I can tell, pretty much everyone in Russia should be trying to leave at the earliest opportunity.
So with that logic, pull requests from the US should also be ignored until they stop their attacks in the straight of hormuz?
Re: Spoiling Linux Kernel with "sanctioned" code
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
So with that logic, pull requests from the US should also be ignored until they stop their attacks in the straight of hormuz?
The US is not nearly as bad as Russia (yet), but it's worth considering.
Re: Spoiling Linux Kernel with "sanctioned" code
#20I've been thinking lately that what underpinned the FOSS golden age was not actually decentralized VCS and high-quality forges, nor even ZIRP, but rather peacetime. After a period of branches and patchsets, full national hard forks are going to become de rigeur, and linux-derived OSes across the world are going to bloom necessarily, as we no longer have the kind of ambient trust required to collaborate across borders…