作者 | Tina Linus Torvalds 常开玩笑说自己会"活到永远"。但以防万一，Linux 内核社区现在也准备好了一套交接方案——只是这份方案并没有点名具体的接班 人。 如果 Torvalds 发生意外，或者哪天决定退休，Linux 不再把一切寄托在"到时候再说"。核心内核社区已经正式起草了一份项目连续性计划：一旦顶层维 护者出现空缺，应该如何在最坏情况或有序过渡中，选出新的顶层维护者（可能是一人，也可能是多人），确保项目长期稳定。 Torvalds 本人则明确表示自己暂无退休打算。被问到未来是否会交棒时，他依旧以一贯的幽默回应，暗示自己更倾向于"继续干下去"。随后他又补充了 一个更现实的理由：家里人同样不希望他突然闲下来，尤其是太太，大概更不想每天被一个无所事事、没事找事的丈夫缠着。 因此也有人提出，与其再找一位新的"终身仁慈独裁者"（BDFL），不如把顶层维护者的职责拆分给多位值得信赖的开发者共同承担。 | ... | @@ -0,0 +1,41 @(a | | --- | --- | | 1 | .. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 | | 2 | + | ...

这样的争论，似乎每隔几年就在社区里出现，却始终停留在猜测层面——直到最近，Linux 社区终于给出了一个相对正式的讨论结果。 上 周 ， 一 份 名 为 《 Linux 内 核 项 目 的 延 续 性 》 （ Linux kernel project continuity ） 文 件 ， 悄 然 被 合 入 了 内 核 文 档 体 系 ， 路 径 是 Documentation/process/conclave.rst。它不聊技术细节，而是直面一个更现实的问题：如果真的进入"后 Linus 时代"，内核项目该如何继续运 转。 转自： CSDN（ID：CSDNnews） 如果有一天，Linux 内核的"灵魂人物" Linus Torvalds 真的不再继续掌舵，这个支撑着全球数十亿设备的开源项目，会发生什么？ 在开源社区里，这个问题从来不缺答案，只是答案彼此矛盾： 这份文档由内核维护者 Dan Williams 起草，也算是内核社区第一次用正式、成体系的方式初步回应"谁来接班"、"怎么交接"这些长期悬而未决的担 忧。 Linux 并不是"一个人维护的项目" 这份文档首先强调了一点，Linux 内核从来就不是一个 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Linux kernel community is debating whether to establish a specific submission guideline for "tool-generated code," particularly concerning AI programming assistants and LLM-generated patches, amid concerns about the influx of low-quality "AI-generated patches" known as AI Slop [1][3]. Group 1: Linus Torvalds' Position - Linus Torvalds emphasizes that documentation should focus on the tools themselves rather than targeting AI directly, as AI-assisted submissions will persist regardless of documentation [1][3]. - He criticizes the notion that AI-generated code can be effectively labeled or regulated through documentation, stating that those submitting low-quality AI code are unlikely to mark it as such [3][5]. - Torvalds dismisses the idea that documentation can solve the issue of AI-generated garbage code, labeling such discussions as naive and ineffective [3][5]. Group 2: Community Perspectives - There are two extreme viewpoints within the community: one side believes AI will destroy software engineering, while the other sees it as a revolutionary force for automation [5]. - Torvalds maintains a neutral stance, insisting that the only appropriate characterization of AI in documentation is as a tool, avoiding any divisive rhetoric [5][6]. - The debate reflects a broader anxiety within the Linux community about the future of development practices and the role of AI, rather than merely a technical specification issue [5][6]. Group 3: Governance and Code Quality - Torvalds argues that rules can only constrain those who are already compliant, and those who wish to submit low-quality patches will ignore any guidelines, regardless of their length [4][5]. - He asserts that the real focus should be on code review mechanisms, the judgment of maintainers, and the community culture, which cannot be automated or regulated through documentation [6].

Core Insights - The introduction of Rust into the Linux kernel has transitioned from an experimental phase to being recognized as a long-term component of the mainline kernel, marking a significant milestone in the ongoing debate about its role in kernel development [1][6]. Group 1: Rust's Journey in Linux Kernel - The Rust for Linux project began in 2020 with a cautious approach, aiming to assess whether Rust could justify the additional complexity it introduces to kernel development [3]. - Over 20,000 lines of Rust code have been integrated into the Linux upstream kernel since 2022, indicating a shift from mere proof of concept to a substantial engineering effort [4]. - Rust-written kernel drivers are now running in real-world environments, such as in Google Pixel devices, demonstrating that Rust's safety benefits are not just theoretical but applicable in practice [4]. Group 2: Official Recognition and Future Work - Miguel Ojeda, the project lead, announced that Rust support was integrated into the Linux v6.1 version, with the aim of evaluating its suitability for kernel development [5]. - The conclusion of the experimental phase does not imply that all challenges have been resolved; significant work remains regarding compatibility across different architectures and configurations [6]. - The acknowledgment of Rust's role in the kernel signals to companies and developers that Rust is a viable long-term investment, encouraging more training and development in Rust for kernel projects [7]. Group 3: Upcoming Projects and Developments - Several significant projects involving Rust are set to be integrated into the Linux mainline, including: - The Asahi project, targeting GPU drivers for Apple Silicon, with support for Devicetree schema expected in Linux 6.17 [8]. - The Nova driver, a Rust successor to Nouveau for NVIDIA GPUs, aiming for initial activation in Linux 6.19 [8]. - The Tyr driver for ARM Mali GPUs, which has already been able to launch the GNOME desktop and run basic games on Linux 6.18 [8].

Core Insights - Linus Torvalds expresses a generally positive attitude towards vibe coding as a way to introduce newcomers to programming, but emphasizes it is not suitable for production-level code due to maintenance concerns [2][5][31] - The introduction of Rust into the Linux kernel is seen as a significant change, with Torvalds noting that it is becoming a real part of the kernel rather than just an experimental feature, although the process is slower than expected [3][15][21] - AI's impact on the software development landscape is complex, with Torvalds suggesting that while AI tools can enhance productivity, they will not replace the need for skilled programmers [34][36] Group 1: AI and Software Development - Torvalds acknowledges the disruptive influence of AI, particularly the influx of AI-generated bug reports that complicate kernel maintenance, although the impact is less severe compared to other projects [4][23][26] - He has not personally used AI coding tools but recognizes their potential for improving productivity in certain contexts, while cautioning against over-reliance on them for serious projects [5][27][34] - The expectation is that AI will eventually become a standard tool in software development, similar to compilers, enhancing efficiency without eliminating the need for human programmers [34][36] Group 2: Linux Kernel Development - Torvalds has shifted from primarily rejecting new ideas to occasionally endorsing them, indicating a change in his role as a maintainer to encourage innovation within the kernel community [10][13][15] - The Linux kernel development process has remained stable, but recent years have seen significant debates and changes, including the removal of certain components to reduce friction within the community [15][17][21] - The relationship between Nvidia and the Linux community has improved, with Nvidia becoming a more cooperative player in the Linux kernel space due to the importance of Linux in AI cloud applications [4][21][22]

Core Insights - The Intel 80386 processor, launched in October 1985, marked a significant turning point in personal computing as the first 32-bit chip in the Intel PC product line and the origin of the IA-32 instruction set [1][5][14] - The 80386 featured 275,000 transistors and operated at a frequency of up to 16 MHz, supporting a maximum address space of 4GB, which laid the foundation for true multitasking and virtual memory [1][4] - The introduction of the 80386 led to the development of various operating systems, including early versions of Windows and Linux, which utilized its advanced features [4][12] Group 1: Historical Context - The 80386 was developed as a response to the competitive landscape, particularly after IBM rejected Intel's earlier designs, leading Compaq to be the first company to launch a computer with the new CPU [2][11] - The Deskpro i386, released by Compaq in September 1986, was priced at $6,499 and became a pivotal product in the PC industry [2][10] - The architecture of the 80386 was influenced by the need for backward compatibility and the desire to create a more powerful and efficient processing unit compared to its predecessors [6][8] Group 2: Technical Advancements - The 80386 introduced a protected mode and paging capabilities, which allowed for better memory management and the ability to run multiple DOS sessions simultaneously [1][4][8] - It expanded the instruction set significantly, adding 54 new instructions and various addressing modes to effectively utilize the 4GB address space [8][10] - The architecture's design enabled the development of a robust ecosystem around the 80386, leading to its widespread adoption in servers and mobile computers [14] Group 3: Market Impact - The 80386's success was crucial for Intel, as it faced significant competition from other manufacturers who were also producing x86-compatible processors [5][12] - By the late 1980s, the 80386 had established itself as a standard in the PC market, leading to the creation of a diverse range of applications and operating systems that leveraged its capabilities [12][14] - The processor's legacy continues today, as modern x86 processors still retain the core architecture established by the 80386, highlighting its lasting influence on computing [14][15]

Core Viewpoint - The article narrates the journey of a programmer who developed the Linux operating system, highlighting the challenges faced and the eventual success achieved through perseverance and innovation [21][39]. Group 1: Early Influences and Learning - The protagonist had a strong affinity for mathematics, physics, and computer science from a young age, which shaped their future career [7][10]. - A significant book, "Operating Systems: Design and Implementation," profoundly impacted the protagonist, providing deep insights into machines and programming [18][21]. Group 2: Development of Linux - In the early 1990s, the protagonist assembled a computer for $3,500, which became a crucial tool for programming [22]. - The initial version of the Linux kernel (0.01) was released and made open-source, leading to contributions from developers worldwide [31][32]. Group 3: Financial Success and Contributions - The protagonist received stock options from Red Hat as a token of appreciation for contributions to Linux, which later resulted in a net worth of $5 million [38][39]. - The development of Git, a code management tool, was another significant achievement that emerged from the protagonist's efforts [41]. Group 4: Philosophical Insights - The article concludes with a philosophical perspective on life, emphasizing survival, social order, and entertainment as the three essential steps in life, with coding being a source of joy for programmers [42].

Core Viewpoint - Linus Torvalds publicly criticized a Google engineer's RISC-V code submission for Linux 6.17, labeling it as "garbage" due to its poor quality and late submission [2][3][5]. Group 1: Criticism of Code Quality - Torvalds emphasized that the newly submitted RISC-V code contained unnecessary and poor-quality additions that do not pertain specifically to RISC-V [6][9]. - He provided examples of problematic code, such as the "make_u32_from_two_u16()" helper function, which he argued complicates understanding and makes the code worse [7][9]. - Torvalds insisted that such low-quality submissions should not be sent, especially late in the merge window, and warned developers against future late submissions [10][9]. Group 2: Developer Communication - Torvalds's comments were not merely harsh; he aimed to provide constructive feedback to improve code quality and adherence to submission timelines [3][4]. - He advised developers to submit their pull requests early in the merge window and to ensure that the code is of high quality, stating that "no more garbage" should be submitted [10][9]. - The response from social media regarding Torvalds's outburst was mixed, with some appreciating his directness and others questioning his approach [3].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights a significant gathering of four influential figures in the tech industry: Mark Russinovich, Bill Gates, Linus Torvalds, and David Cutler, emphasizing the potential impact of their collaboration on future technological advancements [1][2][4]. Group 1: Individual Contributions - **Bill Gates**: Co-founder of Microsoft, instrumental in developing the Windows operating system, and a key figure in the personal computer revolution [5]. - **Linus Torvalds**: Creator of the Linux operating system and Git, pivotal in the open-source movement, with Linux being a core system for servers and supercomputers [6][7]. - **Mark Russinovich**: Chief Technology Officer of Microsoft Azure, known for his expertise in Windows internals and contributions to cloud computing and system architecture [8][10][12]. - **David Cutler**: Renowned for developing major operating systems including VAX/VMS, Windows NT, and Azure, recognized as a leading figure in modern operating systems [13][14][15]. Group 2: Industry Impact - The meeting of these four leaders represents a convergence of ideas that could lead to significant innovations in technology, particularly in operating systems and cloud computing [4][16]. - The article suggests that future collaborations among these figures could yield groundbreaking advancements in the tech industry, potentially influencing the direction of software development and cloud services [4][16].

Core Points - The Linux kernel development process is complex and involves collaboration among thousands of developers, which can lead to tense situations and conflicts [1] - During the Linux 6.16 merge window, Linus Torvalds expressed anger over suspicious submissions from Kees Cook, which included 330 pull requests that appeared to alter author information and forge merge history [2][3] - Linus accused Kees of malicious behavior, stating that the submissions were not simple errors but deliberate falsifications, and demanded an explanation and the removal of the affected code tree [4][6] Incident Details - The controversy arose when Linus noticed unusual Git operations in Kees's code tree, leading to accusations of malicious submissions [3][4] - Kees Cook responded by suggesting that a malfunctioning SSD might have caused the corrupted code tree and promised to rectify the situation [7] - Linus remained skeptical, emphasizing that the scale of the issue indicated a serious problem with Kees's scripts and operations [8] Resolution - The root cause was identified as an issue with the b4 tool, which Kees used for patch management, leading to unintended alterations in commit metadata [9] - Konstantin Ryabitsev, the Linux infrastructure maintainer, confirmed that Kees did not act with malice and proposed to restore Kees's account after addressing the tool's issues [9] - Linus agreed to the account restoration but insisted on modifications to the b4 tool to prevent future occurrences of similar issues [9] Community Reactions - Some developers criticized Linus for his aggressive response, arguing that it was unnecessary given the accidental nature of the incident [10] - Others defended Linus, highlighting the importance of maintaining strict oversight and accountability in the Linux kernel development process [10]