翠星石 on Nostr: ¢нαяℓιє яσσт :arch: :openpepe: 🌶️ Goalkeeper Total "FOSS" death! ...
¢нαяℓιє яσσт :arch: :openpepe: 🌶️ (nprofile…68an) Goalkeeper (nprofile…g20v) Total "FOSS" death!
Linux is only a kernel, a proprietary one at that, that doesn't operate on its own.
The Linux SYSCALL ABI has been mostly ABI compatible for 20+ years (support for old syscalls that nobody really uses anymore can be enabled or disabled with a .config option) and the API is stable.
The ABI and API of macos and ios changes all the time, it's just that apple forces all the developers to port to the latest version, otherwise the software will stop working (they dropped 32 bit support years ago, forcing developers to port to 64bit for example).
Very old windows software is known to break a LOT on newer versions, although microsoft is know for keeping around massive amount of cruft as that makes something things keep working (ReactOS or WINE is sometimes better at running old windows software than windows, not that you should do so).
The GNUlibc (glibc) API has been pretty consistent, with just the addition of functions really - it's ABI is even forward compatible.
GtK+, GtK2, GtK3, GtK4 and Qt software all work just fine on Xorg and wayland does support GtK+, GtK2 & GtK3 software via Xwayland.
Linux doesn't follow any standards, but that really doesn't matter as long as it keeps its syscall API usable by glibc.
GNU is mostly POSIX-compatible, meaning that if you have free software written for some POSIX-compatible OS, chances are it will compile and work with no or minor modifications, but really POSIX is treated as a suggestion; https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#Non_002dGNU-Standards
Following any standard is much less important that keeping free software free mind you; https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#Legal-Issues
The reason why there isn't much proprietary software on GNU/Linux doesn't have anything to do with "moving targets", as glibc and Qt have been around for decades - the reason is mostly due to developer incompetence (which is surprising considering getting software to compile and work on GNU/Linux is a breeze thanks GCC gcc, GNU make and GNU autools, unlike on windows, where it's actually only feasible to compile anything via windows ports of GCC and GNU make via MSYS2 or via "visual studio" (which has a bloated installer that is very likely to fail to actually install the damn thing)) and also library proprietary sabotage via proprietary windows-only libraries and databases, but that isn't a bad thing, as every proprietary program ported is yet another piece of temptation that soils the freedom.
Really, I can grab decently written 20 year old software and compile it just fine on GNU/Linux-libre with only a few patches and good luck doing that on windows or macos.
Linux is only a kernel, a proprietary one at that, that doesn't operate on its own.
The Linux SYSCALL ABI has been mostly ABI compatible for 20+ years (support for old syscalls that nobody really uses anymore can be enabled or disabled with a .config option) and the API is stable.
The ABI and API of macos and ios changes all the time, it's just that apple forces all the developers to port to the latest version, otherwise the software will stop working (they dropped 32 bit support years ago, forcing developers to port to 64bit for example).
Very old windows software is known to break a LOT on newer versions, although microsoft is know for keeping around massive amount of cruft as that makes something things keep working (ReactOS or WINE is sometimes better at running old windows software than windows, not that you should do so).
The GNUlibc (glibc) API has been pretty consistent, with just the addition of functions really - it's ABI is even forward compatible.
GtK+, GtK2, GtK3, GtK4 and Qt software all work just fine on Xorg and wayland does support GtK+, GtK2 & GtK3 software via Xwayland.
Linux doesn't follow any standards, but that really doesn't matter as long as it keeps its syscall API usable by glibc.
GNU is mostly POSIX-compatible, meaning that if you have free software written for some POSIX-compatible OS, chances are it will compile and work with no or minor modifications, but really POSIX is treated as a suggestion; https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#Non_002dGNU-Standards
Following any standard is much less important that keeping free software free mind you; https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#Legal-Issues
The reason why there isn't much proprietary software on GNU/Linux doesn't have anything to do with "moving targets", as glibc and Qt have been around for decades - the reason is mostly due to developer incompetence (which is surprising considering getting software to compile and work on GNU/Linux is a breeze thanks GCC gcc, GNU make and GNU autools, unlike on windows, where it's actually only feasible to compile anything via windows ports of GCC and GNU make via MSYS2 or via "visual studio" (which has a bloated installer that is very likely to fail to actually install the damn thing)) and also library proprietary sabotage via proprietary windows-only libraries and databases, but that isn't a bad thing, as every proprietary program ported is yet another piece of temptation that soils the freedom.
Really, I can grab decently written 20 year old software and compile it just fine on GNU/Linux-libre with only a few patches and good luck doing that on windows or macos.