u/Emre-Y

Extremely heavy C coding. How is Gemini CLI with that? Can it read MD files and find bugs and improve the code?

I really need a good coding agent. Like really really good, probably closer to Claude Fable but can't build something that good with budget. So, is this enough, close enough instead?

How to overcome this? Brave somehow works with this DRM thing. But firefox doesn't.

Is it any better than Claude Code? Is it as strong as that?

I've came up with a good idea, that would make people get money even from GPL code. But noo gaining money bad, you can't get money from GPL or BSD or whatever, says who?

Idea is basically this, what if I have written some code for some hardware, which I have tons of that. It has some GPL elements, but I am smart, I want to increase profits. I don't sell to individual people right away, I first sell that to big companies, or a single company in huge amounts, like say 2000 of them. Then I'd release the code. Because individuals might ask for GPL code right away, that's bad for bussiness, don't want to explain why. Just accept this as is. Just need to secure the sellout first. Because then, it's okay because got profits, also code is released. What is wrong with that?

I believe in liberal economy, and I can sell my stuff to whoever I want, in what quantity I want. Like lets say, I am only selling a device, minimum buying is 1000 of the device. I won't sell that device one by one. I might not want to sell it to individuals. That's what big distributor companies too. It so happens that I am a developer, aswell as I have some hardware stuff just laying around. This is the best outcome for me. Otherwise those hardware are just thrash really. With this, at least those hardware could be used.

And people tell me this is gatekeeping or some stuff, evilness blah blah. I always think of myself first, this is not damn evil. Well, to hell with you all really. Why would I develop an extremely difficult software, and release it without having profits first? It fits within the GPL, I am clean. I don't care about what you think. Evilness? You don't even know me. Some people are just plain cruel and stupid. To them, wanting to get money=evil. In this case, the code is released too.

I am thinking of something like this, does this even exist? I kinda have tons of PC's that I'd like to work on which probably has GPL elements to it, but GPL kinda restricts me here. Why? I need food all right? I need to earn money from it, or else why would I bother? Also see good hardware being wasted, and it makes me sad too, just good stuff being e-waste.

So, I was thinking this, what if I did have written open source code for those hardware, but then, I don't sell it to individuals. Because GPL doesn't restrict me on that right? I might not sell to the individuals, because individuals might ask me about GPL code immediately. This is not good for bussiness right away, at least at first. You just need to "secure the sellout" you know?

Ok, no selling to individuals but to companies? What if I sell that to only one company in like, huge amounts, say like 2000 of them? I could then just give the code to the company and not crush GPL right? Then that's their problem. Because those aren't easy devices to port, really. I've literally had been trying on one for weeks. It's driving me nuts. There is a lot of effort needed.

Let's take this one step further. What if, there was a site like gofundme, that an open source developer can sign up to, and then put his code there, and say like I want 10.000 € for this code, then if that amount is collected, the code is released in a github repo or something. Community wins, open source developer wins. Companies win also?

I've been seeing posts about open source developers being burnt out. I think this is the only way to leverage them a little. It's not evil either.

Just curious, if Devuan is used in the industry well?

There's a lot of excitement around ARM laptops right now, now that Nvidia also got into this. Better performance per watt, impressive battery life, Apple Silicon changed everyone's expectations. I get it. But there's a persistent issue that doesn't get enough attention: the Device Tree situation is a mess, and it actively hurts the Linux ecosystem on ARM.

Quick background for those unfamiliar: on x86, hardware describes itself to the OS via ACPI. The spec is public, the interface is standardized, and decades of kernel quirks have papered over most vendor weirdness. It's not perfect, but it works, Linux knows what to expect from any x86 machine.

On ARM, the equivalent is Device Tree (DT). In theory, it's even better: a plain-text source format, human-readable, version-controllable. In theory.

In practice, vendors ship the compiled blob (.dtb) without the source. You can decompile it with dtc -I dtb -O dts, but what you get back is often half-meaningless: anonymous node names, undocumented vendor-specific bindings, missing properties, and zero upstream documentation. The "open format" is open the same way a stripped binary is "open" technically true, practically useless.

What makes this worse than the ACPI situation is the lack of accumulated knowledge. With x86, every time an OEM shipped a broken ACPI table, someone fixed it in the kernel. Those fixes compound over timedrivers/acpi/quirks.c is basically a museum of every vendor mistake ever made, and Linux benefits from all of it. With ARM, every new SoC vendor starts fresh. Qualcomm's power management looks nothing like MediaTek's. The kernel has to learn each one from scratch, and if the vendor doesn't upstream their DTS, that knowledge lives in a downstream fork forever.

This isn't just a philosophical complaint. It has real consequences:

>You buy an ARM laptop. The vendor ships it with Android or Windows. Six months later you want to run Linux. Wi-Fi doesn't work. Suspend/resume is broken. Display backlight control is missing. You go looking for fixes and find a three-year-old patchset that never got merged because the vendor stopped responding to review comments.

The irony is that DT was designed to avoid exactly this kind of fragmentation. The idea was that hardware description should be separate from the kernel, making it easier to support new hardware without kernel changes. Instead, it became a convenient place for vendors to dump an opaque blob and call it "Linux support."

I'm not saying ARM laptops are bad hardware. I'm saying the ecosystem around them, at least for people who care about running whatever they want on their machines is still far behind x86. Before buying one, the real question isn't "how's the performance?" It's "is the DTS upstream? Who maintains it? What happens when the vendor loses interest?"

Curious whether others have hit this wall, especially on Qualcomm-based and now, Nvidia-based machines lately. There's a lot of excitement around ARM laptops right now better performance per watt, impressive battery life, Apple Silicon changed everyone's expectations. I get it. But there's a persistent issue that doesn't get enough attention: the Device Tree situation is a mess, and it actively hurts the Linux ecosystem on ARM.

I personally will not buy any ARM laptop just because of this.

I've recently found out that with ollama.cpp you can run AI locally with ollama.cpp, even so on AMD RX580 on Linux, it's quite easy and damn awesome! I've got 8GB AMD RX580 and it runs flawlessly. I think it uses vulkan as backend, but how does it compare to Nvidia at high end GPU's? I might get AMD 9060XT or so for cheap, I am considering getting one if this is as good as the Nvidia GPU's of the same price. Is there reliable benchmarks for this?

Is it slow in 2026? I found it rather cheap. I used that device before but then sold for IPad. Then sold that too.

I am just trying to use FreeBSD as a NAS OS. What else could I try for fun, just wondering? What is this bhyve thing, or jails? How could it benefit me?