Though, as the narcs are quick to point out, Android 'is' Linux.

So really, the alternative is proper GNU/Linux (or as I've recently taken to calling it...)

It really isn't, it more like Inferno would have replaced its kernel with the Linux kernel.

It is as close to GNU/Linux as Inferno was to UNIX System V.

Which is why Termux has to work around what is actually available as public APIs on the NDK.

It's still Linux, though, the same way Ubuntu is still Linux despite carrying custom patches and security frameworks.

Termux has to work around security restrictions in a way not dissimilar to how you would need to work around an extremely securely configured SELinux setup on RHEL.

Ubuntu is GNU/Linux, you don't run Afterstep on Android via NDK, unless you rewrite X Windows or Wayland to run on top of OpenGL ES or Vulkan surface that is then hosted inside a AndroidView or JetpackCompose display surface.

Which is what Termux has to do, just like they have to call into specific Android services via JNI, as the NDK only exposes official NDK APIs, alongside the C and C++ standard libraries.

Android uses Linux but it has no consequences for users or developers. So this is practically irrelevant.

See also:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50057296

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50060611

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50060215

You've moved the goalposts from "Android isn't Linux" to "Android uses Linux but it has no consequences for users or developers."

I look forward to "Linux users and/or developers benefit from Android but..."

> from "Android isn't Linux" to "Android uses Linux but it has no consequences for users or developers."

What does "Android is Linux" mean to you? It uses Linux? Why does it matter?

> Why does it matter?

You asserted further up that "Android uses Linux but it has no consequences for users or developers."

That simply isn't true.

What are those consequences?

Related recent discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50051530

Yes, let's throw away a fully mature smartphone OS (AOSP) and replace it by something that does not even have proper app sandboxing. /s

The alternative are other AOSP-based OSes like GrapheneOS and Lineage. Once they are used widely enough and funded enough, they could fork AOSP when needed. In some sense they have already soft-forked in that they use major and QPR2 releases, but put a lot of patches on top to fix issues, improve security, etc.

GrapheneOS has an estimated 500,000 active installs now, apparently LineageOS has 1.4M active installs. Probably around two orders of magnitude more than traditional Linux desktop-based phones, which have been trying since, checking notes, Maemo in 2005?

Btw /e/ OS people have already shared that they were getting ready for a hard fork of AOSP looking at how Google is acting. But to be fair the challenge is more around the hardware support than the OS itself, so in the end it will be the chip makers which will decide which OS can run or not. If they go the AMD way then great, if they go the old nvidia way where even basic reclocking is impossible then we are screwed.

I would be surprised if they have the expertise and manpower to do that.

They are mostly relying on LineageOS now and putting their own cloud, microG, and App Store app and branding on top of Lineage. Even now they are not able to roll out Android releases and WebView updates timely. Them maintaining an AOSP fork would probably end up in an outdated, broken mess.

My money is on GrapheneOS and maybe LineageOS to do it when needed.

I agree, nevertheless, Murena has 50 employees and is profitable as a company. Idk how much money lineage and Graphene have, hopefully the partnership with Motorola is going to provide them some funding.