- cross-posted to:
- linux@programming.dev
- opensource@programming.dev
- cross-posted to:
- linux@programming.dev
- opensource@programming.dev
You must log in or # to comment.
IMO EU should choose an existing project to sponsor. Not make another bad fork.
This OS isn’t made by the EU, but it’s goal is to become sponsored by them:
Is EU OS a project of the European Union?
Right now, EU OS is not a project of the European Union. Instead, EU OS is a community-led Proof-of-Concept. This means it is lead by a community of volunteers and enthusisasts.
The project goal is to become a project of the European Commission in the future and use https://code.europa.eu/. For this EU OS is in touch with the public administration on member state and EU level. So far, EU OS relies on https://gitlab.com/eu-os.
Personally I don’t see why EU wouldn’t just go with Suse. It has the corporate support that I guess these government institutions crave, it’s a good system as far as I know and it’s home-grown. Ubuntu is another option, Canonical is a British company (not EU anymore but it is European).
That makes sense. A reskin of an existing Distro with new funding would be a huge play.
Ubuntu is the most popular but they have a big proprietary push.
It does not fork anything. Right now, it uses already existing fedora / oci images.
yeah this larping is some strange nonsense
any EU policy should support only FOSS platforms, protocols and storage formats so that anyone can immediately use without cost/license and any investment in further development is immediately available to all users and never privatised
companies can provide support services for these systems, there is going to be a lot of them
Is there a filter to block all these EU OS posts, please?
As I see it, it’s hardly an open source project but just some malicious start up attempting to get funded by EU then flee off.
Show me your production ready OS, not your POC boot screens.
And perhaps properly name your product. Naming it after ‘EU’ is self-righteous. What comes next? Earth OS?
Malicious startups can’t survive in the catalogue of the EU comission. In it there are certainly also commercial solutions, but mostly FOSS, OSS and FLOSS. The reason is to recover the sovereign from the US hegemony of the big companies in the web. Respect EU OS, there are in the focus several distros:
Arcolinux of Belgium
Slax of the Czech Republic
Exherbo of Denmark
Daphile of Finland
Manjaro, Lubuntu, Mageia France
Manjaro, OpenSUSE, Haiku, Knopix of Germany
AntiX and MXlinux of Greece
Linux mint, Zorin, Solus Ireland
Endeavour and NixOS of the Netherlands
Alpine Linux Norway
SparkyLinux of Poland
Void of Spain
CRUX of Sweden
Kali Linux Switzerland
FerenOS, UK
https://european-alternatives.eu/alternatives-to
https://european-alternatives.eu/categories
But if you trust more the US soft and services, use these and the malicious soft from there, without the rights and privacy of the EU but those from Trump and Musk.
Don’t forget about Nix and Guix.
The best news from this is that the EU is willing to go these ways. Incredible for consumers in the long run and to combat monopolies.
Yes, they could sponsor something else, but what we also really want are choices and competition.
Any OS specifically designed for the EU Will have so many back doors that security would not be a word that applied to it.
Why not use OpenSuse. We use it where I work in about 25 developer laptops, plus 1 Ubuntu (choice of the person themselves) and it has been rock stable. We should have about 50 by end of this year, out of 950 devices in total. Let’s go for something made in EU and of good quality.
I agree. Most Linux distributions have their base within the EU. Just dumb to bring a new Fedora based dist to the table. Debian is also very connected to the EU and France, even though the SPI is registered within the US.
One could push for The Linux Foundation to to move their HQ to the EU. If that changes anything. I guess it depends on if Linus resigns or wants to move back to Finland.
AFAIK depends OpenSUSE on the company SUSE, which - though based in Germany - has partners and hence ties in the US.
SUSE is owned by the Swedish venture capital firm EQT. For better or worse. All software has “ties” to the US. Remember there are lots of good people in the US as well. Everything isn’t MAGA or tech feudalism.
It has less to do with people than with jurisdiction. The US administration can demand to do this or that on US soil and the maintainer, owner, programmer has little chance to do otherwise if he/she does not want to end in the prison. Hence, my opinion to choose distro with as least as possible influence by the US.
Great initiative!
Now move it to Codeberg ;-)
PS. What’s it based on?
If you read the linked page:
So far, EU OS is a Proof-of-Concept for the deployment of a Fedora-based Linux operating system with a KDE Plasma desktop environment and bootable container technology in a typical public sector organisation.
So far, EU OS is a Proof-of-Concept for the deployment of a Fedora-based Linux operating system with a KDE Plasma desktop environment and bootable container technology in a typical public sector organisation. Other organisations with similar requirements or less strict requirements may also learn from this Proof-of-Concept.
Seems Fedora & KDE
From the FAQ, they want to eventually move to https://code.europa.eu/
As I wrote in the thread about this last month on !linux@lemmy.ml:
I wonder how much work is entailed in transforming Fedora in to a distro that meets some definition of the word “Sovereign” 🤔
Personally I wouldn’t want to make a project like this be dependent on the whims of a US defense contractor like RedHat/IBM, especially after what happened with CentOS.
and, re: “what do you mean ‘redhat is a defense contractor’?!”: here are some links.
(source)
