531

It's only a proof of concept at the moment and I don't know if it will see mass adoption but it's a step in the right direction to ending reliance on US-based Big Tech.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] pupbiru@aussie.zone 4 points 11 hours ago

I'm sure Fedora is full of binary blobs and not-so-free software

fedora is staunchly opposed to non-free software in their default distro … that spat a few weeks ago with OBS was related to that AFAIK

unsure about like signed blobs for “security” services but i imagine they’d be very limited, and optional

rather than sticking a white label on Fedora and call it something else

but for what benefit? no matter what’s trying to be achieved, starting with a very full-featured, robust OS that’s widely used is going to serve you very well… not just technically (less work for the same outcome), but for human reasons

there are loads of guides out there for how to fix fedora issues, few for guix… loads of RPMs that are compatible with fedora, and i can only imagine fewer packages for guix

and then if you’re talking about server OSes - and actually workstations too - managing them with tools like ansible etc… fedora is going to have off the shelf solutions

just Fedora with different theme

well, the actual software and configuration i’d argue aren’t the important part - owning the infrastructure is the important part… package mirrors, distribution methods (eg a website), being able to veto or replace certain packages, and the branding (or regulation) that draws people to it… being able to roll out a security patch to every installation without a 3rd party okaying it, for example

[-] Ferk@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 minutes ago* (last edited 37 seconds ago)

I don't think there are many distributions that are truly free, at least not in the eyes of the FSF. Fedora is not one of them.

but for what benefit? [...] fedora is going to have off the shelf solutions

Yes, but that's my point: fedora is already fully featured.. the work needed is trivial, to the point that directly using an installation of fedora by itself (along with tools like ansible) wouldn't be very different from doing he same with EU OS... at that point you don't need a whole new distro, just Fedora and maybe a trivial script.

well, the actual software and configuration i’d argue aren’t the important part - owning the infrastructure is the important part…

I repeat (the full sentence): "I guess we’ll have to see how much they customize it, but in my experience with previous attempts, I’m expecting just a re-skin, just Fedora with different theme"

Maybe you have a different experience with government-managed distros, but there have been some attempts at that in my (european) country that were definitely not much more than a reskinned Ubuntu (and before that, Debian) from back in the day. They used Ubuntu infrastructure, Ubuntu repositories, and the only extra repo they added was not a mirror, but a place for the few packages that were actually responsible for the theming, reskining and defaults.

Also you did not address the other point (which was the initial main point): do you really think that Fedora and Red Hat would not benefit from it?

this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
531 points (100.0% liked)

Linux

52095 readers
1232 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS