Hacker News
points by ADevWithAnIdea 23 hours ago | 0 comments
Shameless plug for my own project:

https://gravitylinux.org

Spoiler: We have Vulkan 1.4 working, all of M4 and most of M5 working, are making significant progress towards full suspend to ram (no version of Asahi supports this) and this will all be shipped to users very soon!

[–] MYEUHD 22 hours ago
From the FAQ:

Gravity Linux vs Asahi Linux

Gravity Linux and Asahi Linux are two independent projects working towards the shared goal of a strong, open OS ecosystem on Apple Silicon devices. Gravity Linux was initially forked from Asahi Linux over differences in policy, namely regarding LLM use. We have tremendous respect for the Asahi Linux project and emphasize our shared goal of running Linux on Apple Silicon.

[–] viraptor 20 hours ago
> all of M4 and most of M5 working

This is confusing - your website shows M4 as Wip (i.e. pre-alpha) and only M4 mini as alpha. M5 is not listed at all.

Wip is described as "Bring-up in progress. Not usable yet." So is it "not usable" or "all of M4 (...) working"?

[–] ADevWithAnIdea 20 hours ago
Hasn't been shipped yet, integration is being done now, we're shipping a new installer, from scratch graphics driver, and new kernel so there's a lot of moving parts we want to get right.
[–] ffemac 13 hours ago
So it's vaporware.
[–] ADevWithAnIdea 12 hours ago
All the code is already public

https://github.com/GravityLinux/linux https://github.com/niklassheth/mesa-wip

but as a shipped product you are currently right. That'll change when we ship.

[–] csomar 20 hours ago
It's vibe-coded slop. Probably the reason why the Asahi team wanted to exclude these contributions in the first place.
[–] gokhan 20 hours ago
Are you saying "vibe-coded slop" because of the quality of the end result? Who cares if it gives you the features with good-enough performance?

Otherwise one can also say Asahi is compiler-generated slop compared to hand written assembler code.

[–] coldtea 19 hours ago
>Who cares if it gives you the features with good-enough performance?

Some of us still care.

[–] catchnear4321 16 hours ago
Could you elaborate on why?
[–] cromka 15 hours ago
You want longterm support, not a set of pit of tree patches for 7.3 kernel that will stop working or misbehave in 7.4 or 7.10, with no one understanding why.
[–] coldtea 15 hours ago
Besides not wanting hallucinations on my OS level code?

Or not feeling good for the intellectual theft involved in the training of AI to begin with?

Or not caring for the de-skilling of of human brains who are delegating coding to AI, and increasingly even the architectural and decision part?

Or the training material being AI degradation that awaits most code being written by AI?

Or the baragge of slop PRs that overwhelms my favorite FOSS projects?

Or deeping of big AI dependency, in times of climate and economic crisis that it worsens, but that it also risks not having the luxury of it forever?

Or the ease with which any stupid direction can be followed via AI, and the resulting always changing projects, already a problem with short attention span project leads even for big projects like Gnome?

Or the lack of deeper understanding to control all this in future generations of programmers reduced to "AI operators"?

[–] veidr 14 hours ago
Only your first sentence has anything to do with why you would care in relation to Asahi Linux & Gravity Linux.

The rest is all just why you don't love AI generally.

(Not saying you're wrong; just that you expanded the topic substantially.)

[–] xoa 18 hours ago
>Are you saying "vibe-coded slop" because of the quality of the end result? Who cares if it gives you the features with good-enough performance?

There are a few significant reasons worth considering when getting down to the level of OS and hardware drivers. Long term maintainability is one. But another big one is that such software is capable of physically and permanently destroying the hardware it's operating on, with the textbook example for Macs being the speakers found in Macbooks. The only way to get the kind of performance they offer out of that physically light/thin package is to give them the power to destroy themselves if run at full force continuously but then run it from software so that they aren't run at full force continuously, but rather take advantage of the headroom that offers for very brief audio spikes whose overall integrated power still falls below safe limits. This all needs to be done from software since response of real world analog isn't instant. That enables much more range then if they were hardware capped at the maximum level they could run constantly, but it also means that if they're driven wrong, poof. The drivers have to never go to certain bad states, purely from software.

LLMs can't offer those kinds of guarantees, they don't really "know" how things work and then produce something deterministic off of that. It's even worse if, as-is the case with this sort of vibecoding effort, the LLM operator is in fact depending on the LLM for that part because they don't know how it really works either (vs someone who is just using it for boiler plate and knows exactly where the critical paths are).

Obviously everyone is welcome to roll the dice with their own hardware as they wish, and it may be ok. Or if using really old hardware one might just not care. And not all hardware is as sensitive as modern notebooks of course. Just be aware the analog world can be messy and you might not actually have the guardrails to screw up that you're used to in a higher level software environment.

>Otherwise one can also say Asahi is compiler-generated slop compared to hand written assembler code.

No, one cannot say that. Or at least not without looking really stupid.

[–] pitched 2 hours ago
If that issue with the speakers is documented, the LLMs of today would handle it correctly. That wasn’t true very recently. Also, assuming documentation exists is a big crutch that helps them more than us.
[–] csomar 19 hours ago
I prefer reliable software for the Operating System. Like, I can tolerate slop for a game or a one-time-thing of converting a doc or something. But for running the base software (your OS), I think you need better standards.
[–] ADevWithAnIdea 20 hours ago
Just remember that for however bad our code is (and I have no issues saying that most of our linux driver code is absolutely horrific, for now) it's better than Asahi code, because our code exists, and their code doesn't.
[–] prmph 18 hours ago
Wow man, "horrific code" can be worse than no code. Bad code can damage hardware, destroy data, allow exploits, etc. all manner of bad things.

Unless your meaning is that you already have work-in-progress code that you are working on to make much better whereas they have not even started, I don't see how your point makes sense.

But even then it debatable whether making bad code good is better than creating good code from the start.

[–] jasonvorhe 17 hours ago
The website makes it obvious that it's in early alpha stages and is transparent about it:

> This release is intended for developers.

RE always ran a risk of everything you mentioned.

If this project had been started before the AI craze by some RE amateur you probably wouldn't be this dismissive.

[–] torben-friis 18 hours ago
I absolutely don't want to run "horrific code" as my OS. Why would anyone?
[–] vconnor 18 hours ago
Especially in kernel mode. That interfaces with actual hardware.
[–] GeekyBear 13 hours ago
If a kernel coded using AI assistance is unacceptable, then I have bad news about Linus' official policy on AI use in the Linux kernel.
[–] torben-friis 12 hours ago
No one criticized AI assisted work, but the authors admission that the code is shit.
[–] vconnor 12 hours ago
It's certainly bad news, but there's not much any of us can do about it, can we?

Enshittification comes for everybody.

[–] jasonvorhe 17 hours ago
Isn't it great how free software means having a choice? I love it.
[–] cromka 15 hours ago
Yes, being able to buy a hacked-together microwave that can explode in your face and one that is tested and certified is amazing! Especially if you’re clueless about how they’re made and you just want a microwave.
[–] yjftsjthsd-h 12 hours ago
> and one that is tested and certified

I must have missed that; could you share a link to the Linux kernel that's tested and certified as functional on M4 hardware?

[–] thisismyanon2 20 hours ago
You're talking about code with the potential to damage hardware. So, no.
[–] ffemac 13 hours ago
Exactly, and that attitude omg. Overall I'm glad I saw his messages - gravity linux is now on my ban list. Not going to touch it in a million years.
[–] veidr 14 hours ago
That's just... not how it works.

Even good code is a liability. Admittedly "horrific" code is a 10x or 50x liability. Sometimes you accept that kind of technical debt because "it's really important" — e.g. the company will go bankrupt, or whatever.

(Historically, btw, this is why proprietary corporate code is often so much worse than even fairly incompetent open-source code. Because it's just not really that important to ship horrific slop when nobody's income depends on it.)

The idea that shipping "horrific" code now is somehow better than not shipping it until it is fit for human consumption works in some narrow business life-cycle scenarios, but not in any kind of user-facing scenario, and certainly absolutely fucking not any kind of user-facing OS implementation scenario... (T_T)

[–] coldtea 19 hours ago
"Code is a liability" - is one of the fundamental tenets of programming.

So, "it's better because our code exists, and their code doesn't" isn't the brag you think it is. Yes, a quick thrown together utility is better than having to manually do something. But that's not the same for an OS, or god forbid, a filesystem.

Especially since the only reason your code exists in the first place is that they did the hard work and your project forked.

[–] justauserid 18 hours ago
> however bad our code is (and I have no issues saying that most of our linux driver code is absolutely horrific

It's the operating system, mate. People don't just use operating systems to take screenshots and then post on social media.

> it's better than Asahi code, because our code exists, and their code doesn't

This is an especially horrific comment if you are really related to the project and this also adds to the perspective on why Asahi team might have wanted to have no nothing to do with this project and related people and their thought process. Anyway, good luck.

[–] rbnhood 18 hours ago
Uhm, I don’t think this is the flex you think it is.
[–] csomar 19 hours ago
> Hasn't been shipped yet

Does it though?

[–] throwaway13337 23 hours ago
Sounds extremely exciting!

If I could run linux on apple hardware without compromise, my life would meaningfully be improved.

It's not well understood how important it is that humans feel in control of their environment. I feel like it's a fundamental to human happiness. Software that takes that away contributes to the general malaise and hopelessness that many are feeling today. It's just water to them at this point. They don't even see it. But it's the primary means of interaction.

Making that a true option to millions of people could do a lot of good for the world.

It's important work.

[–] apatheticonion 20 hours ago
I wholeheartedly agree. If I think about it, I must have thought "god I wish this ran Linux" at least once every single time I opened my MacBook - likely for the last several years.

I have run Asahi and while I love the project, it's not ready for that type of use.

Recently, I got a new MacBook and repurposed my old M1 MacBook Pro for local inference. The unbelievable number of compromises and hacks you need to do to run daemonized always-on software on MacOS was another reminder.

[–] ACS_Solver 17 hours ago
I know it goes completely against Apple's business model, but I'd love to be an Apple customer if I could buy their hardware and use it with software of my own choice. Holding an iPhone or a MacBook feels great, they're all easily among the best consumer electronics ever as far as the physical part goes. But Apple's software is completely different from how I want to use my devices so I just don't end up considering them when buying.

Would love for Asahi or similar projects to be fully usable but it also doesn't seem very likely. Apple is arguably not hostile to other OSes on MacBooks, they're designed to freely boot non-Apple operating systems, but by not publishing any hardware manuals Apple ensures that an Asahi-style project is always going to be well behind, likely years behind, in hardware support.

[–] apatheticonion 6 hours ago
Absolutely. In some ways it makes me wonder if the ability to boot unsigned OSes was just to avoid anti trust lawsuits.

Despite the ethical grey area of LLMs regarding stolen IP, I'm at the point where I'd cheer on a complete set of reverse engineered firmware appear.

Damn the consequences

[–] Danox 2 hours ago
Oh, they’re definitely hostile, by the way, Darwin is still open source, but no one’s bothered in 26 years market inertia? Just like no one’s bothered to take a license out with SoftBank to design something from the ground up (like those three ex Apple engineers) using Linux, the easiest and fastest way to get something working from the ground up.
[–] Danox 2 hours ago
Wouldn’t the time be better spent taking a license out? With SoftBank to design? Arm chips that work from the ground up running Linux instead of this time-wasting exercise? Apple is one year away from M7 two years away from M8 processors Asahi are just chasing smoke…
[–] akoboldfrying 23 hours ago
> I feel like it's a fundamental to human happiness. Software that takes that away contributes to the general malaise and hopelessness that many are feeling today.

I would like to see a full-featured Linux on Apple hardware too, but I think over 99% of people don't feel anywhere near this strongly. Do you feel this strongly about being able to replace the engine in your car with one you made yourself? I don't, and I think most people view computers the same way.

[–] anonymous908213 22 hours ago
> Do you feel this strongly about being able to replace the engine in your car with one you made yourself?

I am not one of those people, as I do not do cars, but I would hazard a guess that most car people over a certain age do in fact feel very strongly about what modern cars have become. The ones who grew up without knowing what ownership feels like less so, which reflects the exact same dynamic with younger generations who are growing up without ever knowing what it feels like to own the hardware they use.

[–] tonyedgecombe 21 hours ago
As a person over a certain age I mostly like the fact that cars are so much more reliable than they were when I started driving.

I like the creature comforts on a long journey. I would have given my right arm for satnav when I was driving for work.

I’m much the same when it comes to technology. A phone that doesn’t break is much more valuable to me than a repairable device that fails.

[–] throwaway132448 21 hours ago
I think it would be disingenuous not to point out that this was also true of new cars 20 years ago - which is much more pertinent to the point of the people you're replying to.
[–] jasonvorhe 19 hours ago
Considering how easy it was to replace engines of most cars before the integration of electronics I'd say it used to be quite common. Just as most hardware vendors used to ship full specs for their components up until the 80s or even 90s.

So, yeah, yes, definitely. I wouldn't be working with computers on a daily basis if I had to use Windows.

I'm not gonna overly generalize this though. I don't think it'll be the same for most people but I tend to not care about what most people do 99% of the time anyways.

[–] no-name-here 18 hours ago
If it was as cheap and easy to install a new engine as it is for an OS, I imagine swapping engines would be even more popular than new OSs. (And I think far fewer would clamor to replace their OS if it cost $x,xxx for each OS swap and took many hours of manual labor - I.e. I think whether someone wants something can be heavily influenced by whether it is ~free vs cost $x,xxx, etc.)
[–] Danox 2 hours ago
If it was easy, someone would’ve done something. with Darwin or many the other abandon/obsolete OS’s from the past…
[–] eptcyka 22 hours ago
I am looking forward to swapping the engine in my MX5, if I ever manage to kill it.
[–] sspiff 21 hours ago
Does all of M4 include full GPU support on those chips? And what about the Apple Neural Engine stuff?

A shame that the community is split like this but happy to see progress regardless.

[–] unglaublich 21 hours ago
Sometimes it can be good to have two teams work independently towards a common goal. I'm sure they'll learn a lot from each other.
[–] saagarjha 1 hour ago
It really seems like the learning is flowing in one direction here.
[–] ADevWithAnIdea 20 hours ago
Vulkan 1.4 on the GPU, D3D12, full AAA gaming support
[–] pizzaiolo 21 hours ago
Are you upstreaming your changes?
[–] superdisk 23 hours ago
Cool, I'm glad someone is taking a more aggressive and LLM friendly approach to doing Linux on Mac. Too bad there's no M3 since that's what I have :P

Not sure if it would be useful for you, but I did get an M3 GPU driver kinda working (it boots KDE, runs Quake and GLXGears, etc) but isn't quite usable yet. But feel free to yank the code if it's helpful: https://github.com/SuperDisk/asahi-plus-slop

[–] apatheticonion 20 hours ago
> Cool, I'm glad someone is taking a more aggressive and LLM friendly approach to doing Linux on Mac

Same. I've been waiting 6 years to run no-compromises Linux on my MacBook. At this point, I don't care if someone uses LLM decompiled firmware ported to Linux.

[–] porphyra 22 hours ago
Omarchy works on M3 with GPU acceleration.
[–] cromka 21 hours ago
Omarchy has no chance upstreaming any of their work, the code is abysmal.

Asahi at least guarantees the quality of their stuff because they upstream everything, sooner or later. Gravity apparently also intends to be upstream-first.

[–] tyushk 22 hours ago
Omarchy is not something I'm comfortable trusting long term, and comes with a lot of cruft.

I'd be very interested in seeing the parent post's project get M3/M3 Pro support; have it working in my system with a patchset on top of Asahi but suspend is leaving a lot to be desired. Unlike Omarchy, the parent post's diff would also be much more reviewable due to it's more limited scope.

[–] dylan604 21 hours ago
I just did a search for gravity linux from the search at the bottom of the HN page. HN is a fickle place as it seems you get more traction by hijacking Asahi posts that when you make your own posts.
[–] saagarjha 1 hour ago
You do realize you’re basically called out directly in their post, right?
[–] felipeparaujo 18 hours ago
Any plans for supporting M3 Ultra? I understand it's a small percentage of the Apple Silicon Macs out there, but I'd love running Linux on my Mac Studio?
[–] mgrandl 23 hours ago
What about ProMotion/120hz and HDR? Last I checked Asahi didn’t really make full use of the Macbook Display. But very interesting!
[–] ADevWithAnIdea 23 hours ago
Works! The code is public at https://github.com/GravityLinux/linux

We also have vrr!

[–] konaraddi 11 hours ago
how's thunderbolt and external display support?
[–] LoganDark 18 hours ago
As coincidence would have it, I checked your website just yesterday and M4 Max was listed as unsupported. Has that changed in the past 24 hours?
[–] ffemac 13 hours ago
Don't bother. Just check his replies. I would not trust him with my hardware, software and data.