It's always impressive when someone builds an OS.
To be noticed by a large community though, a new OS needs to be different from yet another C-based POSIX-style system. We already have a lot of those which are fine enough. It would be nice to see a new OS chucking away that legacy and doing some new things, supporting Linux via a WSL-style system at most.
Hello, thanks for your comment.
Xeneva is built from scratch with modern hardware and modern computing on mind. We're working on making a transitional shift from legacy systems. You can refer to our website, getxeneva.com to get a hint about our purpose, future goals and vision!
Thank you, Team XENEVA.
> To be noticed by a large community though, a new OS needs to be different from yet another C-based POSIX-style system. We already have a lot of those which are fine enough.
Needs to be different
> It would be nice to see a new OS chucking away that legacy and doing some new things, supporting Linux via a WSL-style system at most.
Needs to be similar
The others read this right: New OSs should be different than yet another C-based POSIX-style system. Linux compatibility is a secondary consideration and not so important.
It used to be that Linux ecosystem compatibility was an excuse for not innovating. WSL2 proved that so long as the base design allows for virtualization, one could still support Linux decently enough. So there are no longer any excuses when one can even get lots of compatible-enough software with very little impinging on base design.
The "at most" seems to suggest they want it to be a minor part of the design - i.e. provide it as a layer if you must, but do something interesting with the base thing. It's the exact opposite of your understanding.
I think you misread that. The whole point of that last line was not the word "linux" but the words "at most".
They are not saying it needs to be like linux.
They are saying the most it should do towards linux compatibility is to maybe have some form of WSL.