Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

With Android Oreo, Google is introducing Linux kernel requirements

betanews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 74 posts

Re: With Android Oreo, Google is introducing Linux kernel requirements

#61

Post by zokier »

zanny wrote: post #31
_pmf_ wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AIUI, the situation until now has been that essentially, every Android device released has its own fork of Android. Which is absurd, and explains why the Android security update situation is such a mess. The situation is the same for all embedded Linux devices. All have non-mainlined (and non-sidelined) changes to device tree, startup code, pin muxing code, special kernel parameters, special drivers, specially adju…

> if every vendor has the same issues Except every vendor doesn't . By some magic voodoo witchcraft, x86 remains consistently capable of producing a single kernel that can run on anything from Intel or AMD. Because they upstream their platform support. That is literally it. No, it is not a technical impossibility of the ARM world to support common hardware abstractions like IBM-PC platforms. They choose not to.

The magic voodoo of x86 stems essentially from decades lasting near monopoly, occasionally veering into duopoly, partnered with almost as dominant software vendor.

Re: With Android Oreo, Google is introducing Linux kernel requirements

#62

Post by rayiner »

unethical_ban wrote: post #30
rayiner wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's part of the problem. You face a problem, look online for a solution, and find answers that pertain only to different distros than what you're using. It hasn't gotten much better as far as I can tell. I used Linux as my primary desktop for a few years around 2002-2005 (Red Hat, Fedora, and Ubuntu). Back then, configuration was mostly automatic, though you had to do stuff like install the NVIDIA kernel blob manu…

First of all, I disagree flatly that Linux is hard to use and troubleshoot. Google "blah ubuntu" or "blah fedora" and you get an answer. This isn't 2002. Second, systemd troubleshooting and RDP servers are not common uses for Grandma, so even if valid points were made, most users aren't affected.

The point is that the ecosystem is so fragmented now that Googling often doesn’t get you useful answers. You find an article that applies to some version of Ubuntu, but you’re on Fedora, or you’re on a different version of Ubuntu that’s made major breaking changes in basic components (systems, Mir/Wayland/etc). At least back in 2002 most everything used SysV Init and Xorg.

As to your other point—grandma has an iPad. To the extent Linux has relevance in the desktop, it’s for CS students, people setting up a lab of workstations, etc. Simple stuff like setting up a Remote Desktop is squarely within that use-case.

Re: With Android Oreo, Google is introducing Linux kernel requirements

#63

Post by rayiner »

technofiend wrote: post #41
rayiner wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's part of the problem. You face a problem, look online for a solution, and find answers that pertain only to different distros than what you're using. It hasn't gotten much better as far as I can tell. I used Linux as my primary desktop for a few years around 2002-2005 (Red Hat, Fedora, and Ubuntu). Back then, configuration was mostly automatic, though you had to do stuff like install the NVIDIA kernel blob manu…

>I recently tried to set up Fedora running a VNC or RDP server, and after a couple of days of futzing I gave up. I guess Wayland has managed to regress on that from where X was a decade ago? According the Wayland FAQ [1] they have specifically avoided defining a remote API. [Q]: Is Wayland network transparent / does it support remote rendering? [A]: No, that is outside the scope of Wayland. To support remote renderin…

As far as I can tell, Guacamole is not itself an RDP or VNC server, and doesn’t solve the problem of exposing a Wayland desktop remotely.

Re: With Android Oreo, Google is introducing Linux kernel requirements

#64

Post by RandomOpinion »

zanny wrote: post #31
_pmf_ wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AIUI, the situation until now has been that essentially, every Android device released has its own fork of Android. Which is absurd, and explains why the Android security update situation is such a mess. The situation is the same for all embedded Linux devices. All have non-mainlined (and non-sidelined) changes to device tree, startup code, pin muxing code, special kernel parameters, special drivers, specially adju…

> if every vendor has the same issues Except every vendor doesn't . By some magic voodoo witchcraft, x86 remains consistently capable of producing a single kernel that can run on anything from Intel or AMD. Because they upstream their platform support. That is literally it. No, it is not a technical impossibility of the ARM world to support common hardware abstractions like IBM-PC platforms. They choose not to.

> Except every vendor doesn't. By some magic voodoo witchcraft, x86 remains consistently capable of producing a single kernel that can run on anything from Intel or AMD.

The "magic voodoo witchcraft" is Microsoft's "Hardware Compatibility Specifications for Windows".

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/com...

Linux and the other free OSes run on commodity x86 hardware by targeting the same Microsoft-issued specification. There is no standards body or other neutral organization that defines what an x86 PC is.

Re: With Android Oreo, Google is introducing Linux kernel requirements

#65

Post by petecox »

swiley wrote: post #2

This appears to be the source: https://source.android.com/devices/architecture/kernel/modul... Device tree is mandatory and vendors are encouraged to upstream the code. It sounds like Google has an eventual goal of building a single kernel that can boot on most devices which is a great thing for everyone.

> a single kernel that can boot on most devices

That seems to be also a goal of postmarketOS, which was discussed here recently.

https://github.com/postmarketOS/pmbootstrap/issues/91

Re: With Android Oreo, Google is introducing Linux kernel requirements

#66

Post by cesarb »

zanny wrote: post #31
_pmf_ wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AIUI, the situation until now has been that essentially, every Android device released has its own fork of Android. Which is absurd, and explains why the Android security update situation is such a mess. The situation is the same for all embedded Linux devices. All have non-mainlined (and non-sidelined) changes to device tree, startup code, pin muxing code, special kernel parameters, special drivers, specially adju…

> if every vendor has the same issues Except every vendor doesn't . By some magic voodoo witchcraft, x86 remains consistently capable of producing a single kernel that can run on anything from Intel or AMD. Because they upstream their platform support. That is literally it. No, it is not a technical impossibility of the ARM world to support common hardware abstractions like IBM-PC platforms. They choose not to.

> By some magic voodoo witchcraft, x86 remains consistently capable of producing a single kernel that can run on anything from Intel or AMD.

It went the other direction: anything new from Intel or AMD had to run the same proprietary, binary-only kernels and applications (since MS-DOS was more of a loader, applications could and did access the hardware directly).

Later, Microsoft started specifying exactly what would be required so that their proprietary, binary-only kernel would run (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PC_System_Design_Guide). It was not the vendors upstreaming their platform support; it was Microsoft dictating what the platform support would be. Even today, Linux's ACPI support mimics Windows', since that's what vendors test against.

ARM systems never had a dominant vendor which could dictate its terms, and new systems were not expected to be backwards-compatible with older kernels.

Re: With Android Oreo, Google is introducing Linux kernel requirements

#67

Post by technofiend »

rayiner wrote: post #63
technofiend wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I recently tried to set up Fedora running a VNC or RDP server, and after a couple of days of futzing I gave up. I guess Wayland has managed to regress on that from where X was a decade ago? According the Wayland FAQ [1] they have specifically avoided defining a remote API. [Q]: Is Wayland network transparent / does it support remote rendering? [A]: No, that is outside the scope of Wayland. To support remote renderin…

As far as I can tell, Guacamole is not itself an RDP or VNC server, and doesn’t solve the problem of exposing a Wayland desktop remotely.

Right: Guacamole doesn't do anything for Wayland. It just lets you create a parallel solution.

Re: With Android Oreo, Google is introducing Linux kernel requirements

#68

Post by valuearb »

MattSteelblade wrote: post #7

Describing Linux as "horrendously difficult to use" is disingenuous at best. There are so many different variations between distros and what people mean when they say "Linux" that to categorize them all in this tone is hardly professional. I'm not familiar with betanews.com, but it does claim to be a tech site.

All unixes are wonderfully difficult to use.

Re: With Android Oreo, Google is introducing Linux kernel requirements

#69

Post by valuearb »

fmntf wrote: post #3
swiley wrote: post #2

This appears to be the source: https://source.android.com/devices/architecture/kernel/modul... Device tree is mandatory and vendors are encouraged to upstream the code. It sounds like Google has an eventual goal of building a single kernel that can boot on most devices which is a great thing for everyone.

I do not think it can be done. I am mantaining a kernel for ARM a family of SBCs. Device trees are great compared to old platform files, however they are not enough. We have a lot of commits to fix other things that DT cannot access.

Does Apple do it?

Re: With Android Oreo, Google is introducing Linux kernel requirements

#70

Post by pjmlp »

valuearb wrote: post #68
MattSteelblade wrote: post #7

Describing Linux as "horrendously difficult to use" is disingenuous at best. There are so many different variations between distros and what people mean when they say "Linux" that to categorize them all in this tone is hardly professional. I'm not familiar with betanews.com, but it does claim to be a tech site.

All unixes are wonderfully difficult to use.

With the exception of Apple and Google OSes, because being a UNIX is almost an implementation detail.
Post reply on HN