News - 2026/02/11 - Linux is Dead
Author: Kevin Day
Description: News post on 2026/02/11.
Keywords: Featureless, FLL, Kevin Day, Kevux, Linux, Library, Distribution, Open-Source, News, 2026

# 2026 / 02 / 11 - Linux is Dead

I have spent a great deal of time observing Linux over the years. This is not to say that the Linux Kernel no longer exists. Instead, it is to say that the concept, the movement, the ideology, the drive, and the freedom that all represents the concept that is Linux is what has died.

## What is Linux

There is a common misconception on what Linux actually is. Linux, or more specifically, the Linux Kernel is just an Operating System. It is neither a movement, nor is it a Distribution.

A Distribution on the other hand, is a complete system containing the Operating System and the User Space Software as needed and as defined by a given Distributor.

Treating a Distribution as the same as an Operating System is a common mistake due to how other Distributions tightly couple their Operating System to their Distribution. An example of tightly coupling the Operating System with the Distribution is Microsoft Windows.

This language situation has resulted in the term Linux being used to also represent the open-source ideology and movement that is guided by the open-source flag ship known as the Linux Kernel.

It is this ideology and movement, this concept and drive, that is casually referred to as Linux that has truly died.

## System Disease

A healthy body is generally disease free. An unhealthy body often has some disease or another. In this case, a product called SystemD has spread amongst the open-source Linux community. This software project brought in designs proven to be bad and insecure in technology as seen in products such as Micrsoft Windows. Note that this is not specific to Microsoft Windows it is more to say that Microsoft Windows is a prominent example of this flawed and insecure design paradigm.

There are two major aspects of this System Disease that have infested Linux.

1. The divide and conquer troll like community
2. The infectious nature of the technical SystemD design.

If SystemD were like any other open-source project, then people would simple use it or simply not use it. Very few people would really care what another person uses in their Distribution. However, for whatever reason, trolls came out of the wood works to attack, harass, and polarize the open-source community. This caused SystemD to get more attention than it would have and actually helped to expand its popularity, despite its inherit technical flaws.

To make matters worse, many Distributions already had a core design and a thriving community. A community that already provided what they were looking for but now were being forced to change the entire foundation of their Distributions. This not only made many of their own users unhappy, it also further polarized the open-source community. And thus began the first symptom of the System Disease.

As with all diseases, the normal healthy functions that had previously worked began to function improperly. The System Disease started requiring other software, unrelated to SystemD, to suddenly require support for SystemD in order to function properly or at all.

This is the hallmark of a virus where the project requires other projects to adopt its design. Which then forces even more projects to have to support the virus. If anything, one could call SystemD one of the most dangerous software viruses in Linux Distributions at this time.

Distributions designed for small Personal Computers, like the Pinephone have suffered significant problems due to the System Disease. The Post Market OS is one such example where the small team managing the project could no longer sustain the efforts needed to gut out the System Disease from the various projects that used to work in Linux without caring about what system initializer software is being used. The Post Market OS has had to abandon their previous effort and instead embrace SystemD.

The Linux From Scratch team has even been forced to change the future direction of their project. Consider this quote from the February 1, 2026 Future direction for LinuxFromScratch announcement "With some regret, LFS/BLFS will no longer be developing the System V versions of the books. ... As a personal note, I do not like this decision. To me LFS is about learning how a system works. Understanding the boot process is a big part of that. systemd is about 1678 "C" files plus many data files. System V is "22" C files plus about 50 short bash scripts and data files. Yes, systemd provides a lot of capabilities, but we will be losing some things I consider important." by Bruce Dubbs.

Abandoning their own community and embracing SystemD in turn further fractures the open-source community, fragmenting them into smaller groups that cannot independently sustain all of the software that is needed in this day and age due to the ever increasing complexity of software.

## Firefox and the Dead Standards

Open-source software over the past decade, in general and outside of encryption algorithms, has actually stagnated in development. The perception of this as a whole, however, is quite the opposite due to the advancements in hardware available as Personal Computers and availability through browsers. Think of how the Personal Computer, known as the iPhone evolved and subsequently, the Personal Computer known as the Android.

Web browsers, like Mozilla Firefox, continued adding new features at a fast pace due to how the HTML5 standard ended up being designed as a Living Standard. Most of the functionality provided in web browsers is actually functionality that Personal Computers already provided. The reason why a large number of the populace has not noticed that they are being sold what they already have is because propriety software designs tended to prevent them from using most of the existing technology and open-source software was still catching up.

This Living Standard might allow for fast development but it ultimately undermines what a standard is. Details of this are described in the A Living Standard is a Dead Standard article.

As the Living Standard changed, so did Mozilla Firefox. Mozilla Firefox brought in a new language called Rust. Regardless of whether a user liked Rust or not, separating from Mozilla Firefox has become incredibly difficult when paired with a Living Standard.

Old browsers that should work but no longer can work. New browsers that should be able to be compiled and tweaked cannot easily be done so.

Even if users wanted to break away from Mozilla Firefox (or similar browsers), they cannot do so very easily. With a fractured open-source community, this has become even more difficult. Mozilla Firefox appears to have taken advantage of this and has betrayed the open-source ethos by adding in practices that were historically reserved to propriety software or malicious open-source projects. Telemetry. Spy ware. There are many terms for this behavior. And Mozilla Firefox even did so without the users consent. Just read up on the Beyond Linux From Scratch Firefox Guide. Quote: "... With the Addons Fiasco, Mozilla was found to be collecting user's data, including saved passwords and web form data, without users consent. Mozilla was also found shipping updates to systems without the user's knowledge or permission...".

This so called Living Standard has helped ensure that no developer can easily break away and develop an alternative to malicious browsers such as Mozilla Firefox. The lack of a stable standard is now shown to become a cancer upon the open-source community and therefore the ideology and movement known as Linux.

## RuST Disease

Behind the scenes, another disease, known as Rust has been spreading. This programming language, known as Rust, is similar to SystemD in the terms of how there is a polarizing troll community attacking it and in effect raising attention to it beyond what would otherwise be natural. Unlike SystemD, however, Rust makes claims to be even more secure.

The general idea behind the security claimed by Rust is on the principle that other people cannot program correctly, or more specifically safely. Therefore, they should not be allowed to program and instead the Rust compiler will handle the details. This essentially takes the responsibility and burden of ensuring the code is safe and secure and brings it into the compiler. Distributors and other project developers are no longer able to manage security and practices their way and must trust the Rust compiler to be correct.

The behavior of the Rust compiler is not really the main concern here. Instead, Rust brings in two enormous security threats.

1. The Cargo dependency manager.
2. Not having a standard (no stable API).

Cargo dependency manager decides it knows what dependencies should be used rather than letting the Distributor, or even local user, from deciding what they want on their own devices. Furthermore, it tends to try to fetch everything online rather than allowing users to fetch and provide the packages themselves. This vastly increases the attack surface area, exposes privacy concerns, and fails to operate in many different environments such as offline.

The security threat that is Cargo is proven by dependency manages such as NPM. The NPM has a long history of causing security problems due to its design. Cargo acts in the same manner and brings in the same class of exploits.

This lack of a stable standard coupled with Cargo means that very few programmers will be able to fork a Rust based project, such as Firefox. This, in effect, is a poison to the ideology and movement known as Linux.

## Lost Technology

A long term net effect of situations like those with SystemD and Rust has caused most of the long-standing software to be incompatible with more recent code. Right now, there is still some ability to separate and use older technology. Especially given that most of the newer software is providing what is already available and has already been available for some time, but perhaps with a little less polishing.

The final nail in the coffin that has led me to believe that the ideology and movement that is Linux is dead is that most of the long-standing Linux based software will very soon no longer work. Not because there is a problem with the software. Instead, because the current popular trends are breaking this functionality with code that is both obtuse and obscure.

The code that once defined what Linux is, is now quickly becoming a lost technology.

## The Future

The death of Linux is not intended to mean that open-source itself is dead. Instead, it means that the future movements will actually be something else. Think of this as analogous to that of children of Linux. Similar in some ways and different in others, but ultimately a brand new creation.

The path forward out of this is indeed to create something new. The open-source community, if it is to survive as true open-source community rather than this hollow existence that it is Today, must fork and separate from these badly designed and effectively diseased projects and create something new.

Real standards should be written that are both open and consistent.

Decentralized dependency managers should replace centralized managers so that individuals can deviate to their hearts content.

Browsers should be made simpler and should better utilize what is already available and has already been available in safer and less invasive manner.

This won't be Tux, as even the Linux Kernel has become infected by the RuST Disease. But it will be something.

The future can be bright, but only if the community breaks away from these bad software trends and re-establishes its roots in more sound, secure, private, and decentralized manner using more maintainable and easier to tweak software. Establishing more open standards that provides both a way to freely use and follow as well as a means to deviate and diverge.

Kevin Day