Hi,<div><br></div><div>Interested in some perspective here since the list has influential Linux people like Ted Tso.</div><div><br></div><div>Linux has been described as influenced by Minix and System V.  The Minix connection is well discussed.  The SysV connection something something Linus had access to a spec manual.  But I’d guess reality would be more gradual — new contributors that liked CSRG BSD would have mostly gravitated to the continuations in 386/BSDi/Net/Free that were concurrent to early and formative Linux development.. so there’d be an implicit vacuum of BSD people for Linux development.</div><div><br></div><div>What I am curious about is the continuing ignorance of BSD ideas.  Linux isn’t exactly insular; a lot of critical people and components came much later on from other SysV flavors (lvm, jfs, xfs, RCU)</div><div><br></div><div>The kinds of BSD things I am talking about are ufs, kqueue, jails, pf, Capsicum.  Linux has grown alternatives, but with sometimes willful ignorance of other technology. It seems clear epoll was not a good design from the start.  Despite jails not being taken to the logical conclusion of modern containers like zones, the architecture is fundamentally closer aligned to how people want to securely use containers versus namespaces and cgroups. And Google ported Capscicum to Linux but it’s basically been ignored in lieu of nebulous concepts like seccomp.  And then there seems to be outright hostility toward other platforms from the postmodern generation with things like systemd.</div><div><br></div><div>This seems strange to me as BSD people are generally open to other /ideas/, we have to be careful with Linux code due to license incompatibility, but the converse is does not seem true either in interest in other ideas or license hampering code flow.</div><div><br></div><div>The history of UNIX is spectacularly successful because different groups got together at the table and agreeed on the ideas.  Is there room for that in the modern era where Linux is the monopoly OS?  The Austin Group is still a thing but it’s not clear people in any of the Freenix communities really care about evolving the standards.  I get that, but not so much completely burrying ones head in the sand to what other OSes are doing.  Is there any future for UNIX as an “open system” in this climate or are people going to go there separate ways?</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Kevin</div>