What’s the point? There are already too many OS.
The point seems to be “not GNU” userland, e.g. not GNU libc, and/or not systemd.
systemd took over from other init system in most Linuxes, e.g. Ubuntu, and is pretty hated, so many distros were forked. I don’t think this affects most end-users (in a bad way, most do not know or care).
The guy came from FreeBSD, which is likely the major BSD Unix-like, except for macOS, which both have non-GNU userland. People there tend to like FreeBSD for for ideological reasons, not copyleft code, GNU GPL and/or think it’s better code (some also that it/their BSD kernels better, but I think this guy realizing it’s not, but only the userland, I’m not sure, he may be wrong on that).
[The userland, like the kernel of default GNU/Linux is still copyleft, but historically GPLv2, now GPLv3, unlike the kernel, still GPLv2. I’m not even sure that’s a real problem, but for some GPLv3, even “GPLv2 and later” licenced, is at least a perceived problem, i.e. claiming that GPL copyleft has been ruined.]
I think he realized like me, that Linux has a viable market share, and FreeBSD (and OpenBSD etc) with tiny, will not, and maybe we don’t need that much diversity in the free OS department.
There’s a reason for all the Free OS/Linux diversity, at least perceived reasons, you buy into the it on several levels from UI, Android UI/toolkit vs. incompatible X and/or Wayland (or Mir!), Android libc vs GNU libc, vs musl, vs lots of other options.
The sad state of Linux desktop diversity: 21 environments, just 2 designs
I think the next priority should be supporting Android (not iOS, Apple basically killed off free apps with their response to EU court judgement, and wasn’t my priority even before).
Not this OS, and I foresee some small problems regarding that (or maybe it just works already and I’m wrong)despite Julia having a separate musl version.
Musl is a good libc, probably interesting to support for the future, GNU libc is a bit bloated, but is it a real problem to just use it? Linux has a nolibc option (but it doesn’t support multithreading), I would rather want someone making a Julia for Cosmopolitan libc, for cross-platform apps across Windows, macOS and Linux…
some also that it/their BSD kernels better, but I think this guy realizing it’s not, but only the userland, I’m not sure, he may be wrong on that
Why would he be wrong on this? He wrote himself that the code of FreeBSD’s userland is cleaner; he also took into consideration busybox and toybox, concluding that toybox is somewhat better written than busybox, which he rejected due to its code.
I think the BSDs simply lack manpower, that is all. Otherwise, they are talented people who know how to design and maintain a great operating system. For example, I am not even able to boot the NetBSD install ISO, unfortunately, because I get a black screen only. NetBSD may have the least manpower; FreeBSD and OpenBSD did boot and I was able to get them to install.
I think it’s simply that the Linux kernel is hard to beat in terms of hardware support. When it comes to GNU, I really don’t see how the situation is similar (i.e., regarding kernels and HW support): on UEFI systems, you don’t even need GRUB anymore, and the GNU userland is bloated and written in a style that most people seem to reject. At least I never came across someone who could explain why theirs would be superior; the whole FSF and GNU movement seems more political in nature.
There are a dozen others. I also think Stallman is one of the least likable people in the free software scene; worse than de Raadt or Torvalds, who may be arrogant, but don’t come across as weirdos supporting a murderer like Churchill.
Therefore, I am happy that Chimera got developed and hope that it may become as popular as Alpine or Void, which are two distributions utilizing musl as well (Alpine lacks the GNU userland by default even).