Linux Archive

My favorite metonymic technology term is “cron job”: even though cron may not literally be the daemon that executes actions on a schedule, we apply the term to anything that walks like a cron and quacks like a cron. As Patrick McKenzie likes to point out, cron jobs are one of the most eminently useful computing primitives. They offer utility that’s almost immediately obvious for plenty of use cases that almost everybody has: do this every day; do that once a month. And yet. You probably shouldn’t use literal cron (or its more modern cousins) for scheduled tasks! In 2026 there are more modern options available, and my favorite is the humble systemd timer. I love systemd timers. If you don’t love them yet, maybe I can show you the reasons why you should love them, too. ↫ Tyler Langlois These are just timers. They are not consuming your computer or taking over the open source world. They do not phone home to Red Hat. These are just timers.

If you visit the Flatpak website today, it lists, as the very first advantage of the project: “Build for every distro: create one app and distribute it to the entire Linux desktop market.” If you then move on to the list of supported distributions, you’ll see the usual suspects, but also distributions like Void Linux, Guix, and Alpine. These last three all have one thing in common: they use an init system other than systemd, because Flatpak doesn’t care what init system you use. It seems that for the next major version of Flatpak, however, that’s going to change: systemd will probably become a dependency for Flatpak. Speaking at the Linux App Summit, Arian Vovk and Sebastian Wick held a great talk about the future of Flatpak. The current version of Flatpak will continue to see a ton of improvements, but at the same time, the limits of what can be done with its decades-old design have become harder and harder to work around. As such, they’re also planning for and working on what they call Flatpak Next, or perhaps Flatpak 2.0, which is effectively a rewrite of Flatpak based on what they’ve learned over the years, making use of modern technologies and ideas that have gained ground since the initial design of Flatpak 1.x. It’s important to note that everything discussed during the talk is planning, and not a single line of code has been written yet. This means that all of these plans are subject to change, and as the work progresses over the coming years, the end result may turn out very different from what’s been detailed in the talk. In addition, and I can’t stress this enough: if anything in this discussion gives you even the smallest of inklings to go and harass, attack, insult, or otherwise bother anyone involved in Flatpak, systemd, or related technologies, please be so kind as to book an appointment for a yoga class or whatever. It seems like you need it. Right at the onset of the talk, Vovk and Wick explain that they want to move the permission management from Flatpak into the service layer, through a new service called systemd-appd. Systemd-appd gives applications an identifier and stores their permissions, and then this data can be queried by the rest of the system. In turn, this enables a slew of other features, not least of which is subsandboxing. At the moment, the plan is to introduce this feature in the current version of Flatpak, thereby introducing a dependency on systemd into Flatpak. From what I understand from Vovk, they were intending to be “super considerate” of distributions and people not using systemd, which I take to mean we’d eventually end up in a situation very similar to systemd-logind, which was extracted from systemd into a separate daemon, elogind, so that distributions using other init systems could still make use of desktop environments depending on systemd-logind. I imagine Flatpak developers wanted to make as many affordances as realistically possible for something similar to happen to systemd-appd, thus ensuring Flatpak would remain available on distributions not using systemd. Obviously, people who are using distributions like Void or Alpine were concerned about the future of Flatpak on their systems. If Flatpak gains a hard dependency on systemd, Flatpak would no longer work on distributions without systemd, so the talk raised questions – sadly, it seems the questions were directed at someone not technically involved with Flatpak development, and his replies were not particularly helpful and often just downright insulting and inflammatory. Even though he’s not involved in Flatpak development, enough people assumed that he was, and a toxic brew stirred. Users with genuine, friendly questions about the future of Flatpak on their systems were met with derision and insults, and it spiraled out of control from there, drawing in the rabid anti-systemd Red Hat conspiracy lunatics (and worse). Things got progressively worse for everyone involved, particularly for Flatpak’s developers. And so we ended up at the situation where everyone’s mad and Flatpak’s developers are “not feeling inclined to spend time on that shit anymore” when it comes to accommodating and making affordances for distributions and people not using systemd. The end result will most likely be that any future Flatpak dependency on systemd will be stricter, and making any independent elogind-like daemon will be much harder than it was going to be. Nobody wins, everybody loses, all because some people thought it necessary and productive to be insulting and inflammatory. As things currently stands, it’s very likely that over the coming years, Flatpak will gain a dependency on systemd, possibly without any affordances for an independent daemon to replicate systemd-appd functionality on distributions that do not use systemd. In other words, Flatpak would no longer be able to boast that it enables “Build for every distro: create one app and distribute it to the entire Linux desktop market.”, as it would no longer be distribution-agnostic. And that’s a shame, because Flatpak fills a real need for users, regardless of whatever init system they use. Which is apparently something some people base their entire identity on, because they’re weirdos.

There is one specific way in which the non-corporate open source projects typically document how their infrastructure work: not at all, and Flathub is no different. The full picture likely lives only in my brain, and while it could be sorted out by anyone (especially in this LLM age, yay or nay), why should it only be me thinking at night about all the single points of failure? Like any system that evolved naturally, it’s all over the place. It’s tempting to tell its history chronologically, but even then, it’s difficult to find a good entry point. Instead, this post focuses on what happens when users call flatpak install; later entries will cover the website and, finally, the build infrastructure. Buckle up! ↫ Bart Piotrowski As time goes by and more and more issues with Flatpak are addressed, I feel my attitude towards the technology change somewhat. I’m still very much a traditional package manager type of person, and will opt for my distribution’s repository if the versions they have are up-to-date, but I’m no longer audibly groaning if an application I want is only really available as a Flatpak. For the increasing number of normal, average users switching to Linux, Flatpak is probably the right way to go, especially since it can easily coexist with your traditional package manager. The only part of the linked article that made me raise my eyebrow was the reliance on Fastly, which seems to form an important linchpin of the whole Flathub stack. Fastly is an American company, and while they support Flathub entirely for free, the state of the world does have me wonder if this couldn’t evolve into a problem in a myriad of ways, perhaps through questionable people acquiring Fastly or through pressures from the clown car US administration. I’m sure it’s all fine, but it’s hard not to think of these things in this day and age.

If you’re sick of Chrome OS on your Chromebook, or can find a Chromebook for cheap somewhere but don’t actually want to use Chrome OS, have you considered postmarketOS? Since I was kind frustrated with ChromeOS, I decided to take a look at something that I knew supported my Lenovo Duet 3 for some time: postmarketOS. For those who don’t know, postmarketOS is an Alpine Linux based-distro focused in replacing the original OS from old phones (generally running Android) with a “true” Linux distro. They also seem to support some Chromebooks because of their unique architecture and, luckily, they support my device under the google-trogdor platform. ↫ kokada PostmarketOS is aimed at smartphones primarily, but supports other formfactors just fine as well. The Duet 3 is one of the tablet-like devices it supports, and it seems most things are working quite well. In fact, judging by the postmarketOS wiki, quite a few Chromebooks have good support, and with Chromebooks being cheap and dime-a-dozen on eBay and similar auction sites, it seems like a great way to get started with what is trying to become a true Linux for smartphones.

Version 7.0 of the Linux kernel has been released, marking the arbitrary end of the 6.x series. Significant changes in this release include the removal of the “experimental” status for Rust code, a new filtering mechanism for io_uring operations, a switch to lazy preemption by default in the CPU scheduler, support for time-slice extension, the nullfs filesystem, self-healing support for the XFS filesystem, a number of improvements to the swap subsystem (described in this article and this one), general support for AccECN congestion notification, and more. See the LWN merge-window summaries (part 1, part 2) and the KernelNewbies 7.0 page for more details. ↫ corbet at LWN.net You can compile the kernel yourself, or just wait until it hits your distribution’s repositories.

It may sound unbelievable to some, but not everyone has a datacenter beast with 128GB of VRAM shoved in their desktop PCs. Around the world people tell the tale of a particularly fierce group of Linux gamers: Those who dare attempt to play games with only 8 gigabytes of VRAM, or even less. Truly, it takes exceedingly strong resilience and determination to face the stutters and slowdowns bound to occur when the system starts running low on free VRAM. Carnage erupts inside the kernel driver as every application fights for as much GPU memory as it can hold on to. Any game caught up in this battle for resources will surely not leave unscathed. That is, until now. Because I fixed it. ↫ Natalie Vock The solution is to use cgroups to control the kernel’s memory eviction policies, so that applications that should get priority when it comes to VRAM allocation – like games – don’t get their memory evicted from VRAM to system RAM. Basically, evict everything else from VRAM before touching the protected application. This way, something like a game will have much more consistent access to more VRAM, thereby reducing needless memory evictions that harm performance. It’s a clever solution that makes use of a ton of existing Linux tools, meaning it’s also much easier to upstream, implement, and support. Excellent work.

Bootc and OSTree represent a new way of thinking about Linux system deployment and management. Building on container and versioning concepts, they offer robust and modern solutions to meet the current needs of administrators and developers. ↫ Quentin Joly Slowly, very slowly, I’ve been starting to warm up to the relatively new crop of immutable Linux distributions. As a heavy Fedora user, opting for Fedora’s atomic distributions, which use bootc and OSTree, seems like the logical path to go down if I ever made the switch, and this article provides some approachable insights and examples into how, exactly, it all works, and what benefits it might give you. It definitely goes beyond what I as a mere desktop user might encounter, but if you’re managing a bunch of servers or VMs in a more professional setting, you might be interested, too. I’m still not convinced I need to switch to an immutable distribution, but I’d be lying if I said some of the benefits didn’t appeal to me.

The team behind Tyr started 2025 with little to show in our quest to produce a Rust GPU driver for Arm Mali hardware, and by the end of the year, we were able to play SuperTuxKart (a 3D open-source racing game) at the Linux Plumbers Conference (LPC). Our prototype was a joint effort between Arm, Collabora, and Google; it ran well for the duration of the event, and the performance was more than adequate for players. Thankfully, we picked up steam at precisely the right moment: Dave Airlie just announced in the Maintainers Summit that the DRM subsystem is only “about a year away” from disallowing new drivers written in C and requiring the use of Rust. Now it is time to lay out a possible roadmap for 2026 in order to upstream all of this work. ↫ Daniel Almeida at LWN.net A very detailed look at what the team behind Tyr is trying to achieve with their Rust GPU driver for Arm Mali chips.

But NixOS isn’t the only declarative distro out there. In fact GNU forked Nix fairly early and made their own spin called Guix, whose big innovation is that, instead of using the unwieldy Nix-language, it uses Scheme. Specifically Guile Scheme, GNU’s sanctioned configuration language. I’ve been following Guix for a bit, but it never felt quite ready to me with stuff like KDE being only barely supported and a lot of hardware not working out of the box. However, now that (after three years) Guix announced its 1.5.0 release with a lot of stuff stabilized and KDE finally a first-party citizen, I figured now is the best time to give it a fresh shot. This post captures my experiences from installation to the first 3-4 days. ↫ Nemin’s blog If you’re interested in Guix, but aren’t quite sure if you want to take the plunge, this article does a great job of showing you the ropes, listing what issues you might run into, some pitfalls to avoid, and so on.

I’ve been terribly sick for a few days so we’ve got some catching up to. Let’s first take a look at how Windows is doing. People often say Linux is “too much work.” And I agree. They’re completely justified to complain. There’s the documentation page diving, the forums, the reddit threads. And, most importantly, you have to basically rewire your brain and stop expecting it to behave like Windows used to. But I looked at the list above and realized: Windows is now also too much work. And the difference with Windows is that you’re going to do all that work while actively fighting your computer only for it to be undone when the next surprise update comes and ruins everything. You might be thinking “just disable updates, man” or “just install LTSC”, or “just run some random debloat script off of GitHub”. Why? Why would I jump through all these hoops? I’d rather put in the effort for an OS that knows what consent is and respects me as a user. ↫ Bogdan-Mihai Mosteanu You know how in most theme parks they have various different rides for all kinds of people? There’s the wild and crazy over-the-top deathcoasters for the ultimate thrill seekers, the more gentle wooden coasters for those who like a thrill, but not over-the-top. There’s the swinging ship-type things for thrill-seeking accountants who seek their thrills predictably. There’s a game of Russian roulette played in the backlot. For the kids, there’s the classic spinning tea cups. And then there’s the public transport service dressed up as an old-timey steam train that just brings you to your destination without any issue, silently doing its thing, the unsung backbone of park logistics. Commercial operating systems like Windows and macOS are the games of Russian roulette, predictably unexpectedly shooting you in the face every sixth time you pull the trigger. That’s not my vibe. I want my operating system to be that steam train, and desktop Linux is the only thing that fits that bill – and it’s very clear more and more people are discovering that too.

The solution the Flatpak team is looking into is to use virtualisation for the graphics driver, as the absolute last-resort option to keep things working when nothing else will. It’s a complex and interesting solution to a complex and interesting problem.

Desktop Classic System is an operating system based on Debian and a customized version of the MATE Desktop Environment that hearkens back to, but is not a direct copy of, the classic Mac OS. DCS seeks to provide and sometimes even improve upon the conceptual simplicity offered by the old Macintosh. ↫ Desktop Classic System website I’m usually not particularly interested in reporting on random Linux distributions, but any one of them that defaults to a proper spatial file manager is one that I will highlight. I’m not entirely sure if this is just a supported feature of MATE’s file manager, or something more custom – there are some patches to Caja here, as mentioned – but spatial file managers are a dying breed and that’s a shame. They’re hard to implement and even harder to get right, which is probably why few people take on the challenge. Other than that, DCS isn’t particularly revolutionary or special, but I’d love for more Linux distributions to look back at what we’ve lost, and see if we can bring those things back.

Elementary OS, the user-friendly Linux distribution with its own unique desktop environment and applications, just released elementary OS 8.1. Its minor version number belies just how big of a punch this update packs, so don’t be fooled here. We released elementary OS 8 last November with a new Secure Session—powered by Wayland—that ensures applications respect your privacy and consent, a brand new Dock with productive multitasking and window management features, expanded access to cross-platform apps, a revamped updates experience, and new features and settings that empower our diverse community through Inclusive Design. Over the last year we’ve continued to build upon that work to deliver new features and fix issues based on your feedback, plus we’ve improved support for a range of devices including HiDPI and Multi-touch devices. ↫ Danielle Foré at the elementary OS blog The biggest change from a lower-level perspective is that elementary OS 8.1 changes the default session to Wayland, leaving the X11 session as a fallback in case of issues. Since the release of elementary OS 8, a ton of progress has been made in improving the Wayland session, fixing remaining issues, and so on, and the team now feels it’s ready to serve as the default session. Related to this is a new security feature in the Wayland session where the rest of the screen gets dimmed when a password dialog pops up, and other windows can’t steal focus. The switch to Wayland also allowed the team to bring fractional scaling to elementary OS with 8.1. Elementary OS is based on Ubuntu, and this new release brings an updated Hardware Enablement stack, which brings things like Linux 6.14 and Mesa 25. This is also the first release with support for ARM64 devices that can use UEFI, which includes quite a few popular ARM devices. Of course, the ARM64 version comes as a separate ISO. Furthermore, there’s a ton of improvements to the dock – which was released with 8 as a brand-new replacement for the venerable Plank – including bringing back some features that were lost in the transition from Plank to the new dock. Animations are smoother, elementary OS’ application store has seen a slew of improvements from clearer licensing information, to a controller icon for games that support them, to a label identifying applications that offer in-app purchases, and more. There’s a lot more here, like the accessibility improvements we talked about a few months ago, and tons more.

If you’re old enough, you no doubt remember that up until the 2.6.0 release of the Linux kernel, an odd number after the first version number indicated a pre-release, development version of the kernel. Even though this scheme was abandoned with the 2.6.0 release in 2003 and since then every single release has been a stable release, it seems the ghosts of this old versioning scheme still roam the halls, because prominent Linux kernel developer Greg Kroah-Hartman just published an explainer about Linux kernel versions. Despite having a stable release model and cadence since December 2003, Linux kernel version numbers seem to baffle and confuse those that run across them, causing numerous groups to mistakenly make versioning statements that are flat out false. So let’s go into how this all works in detail. ↫ Greg Kroah-Hartman I genuinely find it difficult to imagine what could possibly be unclear about Linux kernel version numbers. The Linux kernel uses a very generic major.minor scheme, but that’s not where the problems lie – it’s the actual development process of each of these numbered release that’s a bit more complex. This is where we have to talk about things like the roughly 10-week release cycle, containing a 2-week merge window, as well as Torvalds handing off the stable branch to the stable kernel maintainers. The other oddity is when the major version number gets incremented – the first number in the version number. There’s no real method to this, as Kroah-Hartman admits Torvalds increments this number whenever the remaining numbers get too high and unwieldy to deal with. Very practical, but it does mean that going from, say, 5.x to 6.x doesn’t really imply there’s any changes in there that are any bigger or more disruptive than when going from 6.8.x to 6.9.x or whatever. There’s a few more important details in here, of course, like where LTS releases come from, but that’s really it – nothing particularly groundbreaking or confusing.