Why don't the Hyperbola team work on porting the HURD kernel instead, if
they want to stay in GNU Land with the GPL license?
The GUIX team ported HURD, so they should get together with those guys
and port HURD as the base kernel and then backport all of the
mitigations from Linux and OpenBSD as they see fit with their own
implementation and code whenever they have license convulsions. It seems
like security is their goal, but if they want to stay GPL compliant,
while moving away from the Linux Kernel, then they should work on
bringing the HURD to the mainstream, and then a group of kernel security
gurus can work with their team to fix it up to scratch with
implementations of the modern mitigations. I don't know how realistic
time wise, or man hour intensive that approach would be however.
Ron Rodriguez
Geomatics Engineering Student , University of Calgary
On 1/14/20 8:08 PM, SOUL_OF_ROOT 55 wrote:
Hi Free Software Foundation!
It is written in article "Free GNU/Linux distributions":
"Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre, a long-term support simplicity-focused
distribution based on Arch GNU/Linux."
Reference: https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.en.html
Free Software Foundation,
Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre is not free because is changing to BSD.
References:
https://www.hyperbola.info/news/announcing-hyperbolabsd-roadmap/
https://forums.hyperbola.info/viewtopic.php?id=315
Free Software Foundation,
The Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre is still in list of Free GNU/Linux
distributions.
Will Free Software Foundation remove the Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre of the page
that lists the GNU/Linux <https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html>
distributions
that are entirely free <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html> as in
freedom?
If yes, when Free Software Foundation will remove the Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre
of the page that lists the GNU/Linux
<https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html> distributions that are
entirely free <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html> as in freedom?
