• qyron
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Good. Pump that up. I want to be able to run my favorite open OS on open hardware.

    • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      7 days ago

      Worth noting that just because a CPU uses the RISC-V instruction set does not make it open hardware; it just makes it possible for it to be open hardware, but it’s still up to the copyright holder to release the source files and design as open source.

        • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 days ago

          That’s true, but open source software is generally written in high level, portable languages that can be compiled to multiple CPU architectures without changing the code, so proprietary software is really what would have any problems running, and even then, there are x86 emulators like Box86/64 and FEX out there and can even work transparently using systemd-binfmt.

          • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            7 days ago

            At the application level? Yes. At the OS / package level? It’s still a work in progress. And you need the latter to use the former.

      • qyron
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Still, better than fully proprietary hardware.

        • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 days ago

          In a small way, yes, in that the software ecosystem built around it would work on future open hardware, but the hardware could absolutely still be fully, 100% proprietary.