Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

brocashelm · 2022-07-08 01:22:41

But, what will happen to the distros that fundamentally depend on Systemd? If there's any indication with Ubuntu-based distros switching to Debian, and now this happens.

Yesterday's surprise was that Lennart Poettering quietly had left Red Hat following a decade and a half there leading PulseAudio among other projects and ultimately going on to start systemd that has fundamentally reshaped modern Linux distributions. It turns out he had joined Microsoft and continuing his work on systemd.
After yesterday's article about Lennart no longer being at Red Hat, I began receiving tips that the systemd creator had some time back quietly joined Microsoft along with various public comments on Twitter and other mediums by individuals suggesting he joined the Redmond company... At first I thought they were jokes or just snarky remarks, but after a day of following up with folks, it actually turns out not to be a joke.
The prominent open-source developer responsible for several prominent projects joined Microsoft and continuing his focus on systemd development. While some may not always align with his views or approaches to handling some things, there is no overstating his enormous contributions to the Linux/open-source world and his dedication to advancing the ecosystem over the years.
This may take many by surprise but let's not forget Microsoft has over time employed a number of Linux developers and other prominent open-source developers... Microsoft currently employs Python creator Guido van Rossum, GNOME creator Miguel de Icaza had been employed by Microsoft from 2016 when they acquired Xamarin to earlier this year when he left, Nat Friedman as part of Xamarin-Microsoft served as GitHub CEO following Microsoft's acquisition, Gentoo Linux founder Daniel Robbins was previously employed by Microsoft, Steve French as the Linux CIFS/SMB2/SMB3 maintainer and Samba team member works for Microsoft, and Microsoft employs/previously-employed a large number of upstream Linux developers like Matteo Croce, Matthew Wilcox, Tyler Hicks, Shyam Prasad N, Michael Kelley, and many others beyond just the usual immediately recognizable names to Linux enthusiasts/developers. It was also just earlier this year that Christian Brauner as another longtime Linux kernel developer joined Microsoft. Christian Brauner is Berlin-based like Lennart and moved on to Microsoft after the past half-decade at Canonical working on the Linux kernel, LXC, systemd, and more.
With Linux being widespread on Azure, Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) continuing to prove successful, Microsoft working on Mesa as part of supporting various graphics/compute APIs atop Direct3D 12, ensuring good Hyper-V support within the Linux kernel, and maintaining various internal Linux distributions like CBL-Mariner and Azure Cloud Switch, Microsoft continues attracting more upstream Linux developers including some of the well known faces of the open-source ecosystem. Microsoft has been full of Linux/open-source surprises for many years. Now Microsoft has another key upstream developer with vast experience while able to continue his focus working on systemd.
Microsoft Careers currently shows 663 job postings mentioning Linux.

zapper · 2022-07-08 06:29:59

I didn't suspect this, to be honest...

I knew redhat was trying to
Embrace
Extend
Take Full Control

I just didn't know that Lennart had sunk that low from a while back...

Man is that just plain...

cold, even for him...

That being said, it is also possible, that redhat didn't give a damn if he did.

Given their ways of messing with the distro ecosystem as a whole.

Whether you consider it GNU/Linux or Linux...

So... yeah, this doesn't surprise me, at all.

EDIT: well, except the part about him working for microsoft since a while ago.

Surprised he didn't work for google instead, to be honest...

xD

Last edited by zapper (2022-07-08 06:31:07)

Head_on_a_Stick · 2022-07-08 17:51:18

brocashelm wrote:

But, what will happen to the distros that fundamentally depend on Systemd?

He might continue working on it but even if he doesn't the project will continue.

Nili · 2022-07-09 06:44:11

I used to have a signature "C:\systemd" a few years ago.

chomwitt · 2022-07-16 21:58:55

I thing we live in an era that foss land is attacked. Not exactly the whole word . One letter is attacked.
For me the attack was formely initiated the day RMS visited Redmond (what was on his mind??...) .
Days letter the web lynching of RMS started. Paidophile, autistic , dirty bearfoot hippy..etc.

The great irony?. The MIT scandal raised serious ethical questions about funding from malicious and unethical actors to institutions
that we prefer to envision as public and motivated by higher ideas. Education, knowledge etc.

But the second greatest irony? Many Institutions in the foss land (SFC,Redhad,FSFE) aligned with MIT's heads scapegoating agenda saw that as an opportunity
not to discuss the matter of ethical donatiions but disgracing publicly RMS persona announcing to the plubs the new inclusive order of things.

In that new era.. Linus and Richard are in the social dysfunctional spectrum and in foss fora the new ideas of sponsor hunting and corporate friendliness have taken the sky..

HUGE piles of money (huge propably in our eyes for a big corp propably one medium scale strategy campaing.. for those uninitiated a study of how Uber conducts those affairs should be a good start up tutorial...) and donations from SFC to OpenBSD and Gnome have been softening the ground to let the new order bloosom.

Foss Newsites call us to be thankfull to our benovalent new masters in the fossland.

Last edited by chomwitt (2022-07-17 07:42:16)

auanta · 2022-08-06 13:30:14

You can't make this stuff up. OMG. The man has revealed his hand.

penguin · 2022-09-24 14:12:06

Linus Torvalds schools Lennart Poettering on the importance of users
https://youtu.be/Nn-SGblUhi4

Head_on_a_Stick · 2022-09-24 14:14:27

Here's what Lennart has been working on:

systemd support is now available in WSL

Windows with systemd? A match made in heaven...

EDIT: they claim it's Canonical's fault but we know the truth.

EDIT2: they've used "SystemD". FFS. Are they trying to troll me?

Last edited by Head_on_a_Stick (2022-09-24 19:39:42)

zapper · 2022-10-15 04:24:40

To be honest, it almost seems to me like, microsoft might be planning to go a very specific route, hint:

A certain search engine giant that everyone says to use to find stuff may very well turn out to be their new model of doing things...

I kid you not, they may very well start making more of their system open source, judging by their Azure practices and other stuff.

It would be both awful and sneaky for them to do.

Frankly, if they haven't yet, I am surprised they haven't.

Not sure if that would be more good or more bad or combination of both compared to that search engine giant's way of doing things that I mentioned above.

Camtaf · 2022-10-15 09:07:54

So, MS wants to go Linux, quite a good move on their part, (they've been there before), but why on earth put it on top of their 'Windows' system!

To be honest, I won't miss systemd or pulseaudio, I prefer not to use them anyway...

But....if Linux gets too much more commercialized, I'll be going to the BSDs for my computers.

yeti · 2022-10-15 17:06:21

Camtaf wrote:

So, MS wants to go Linux, quite a good move on their part, (they've been there before), but why on earth put it on top of their 'Windows' system!

Maybe someday they'll flip it upside down.

Windows to become emulation layer atop Linux kernel, predicts Eric Raymond

User479 · 2022-10-16 02:45:54

yeti wrote:

Maybe someday they'll flip it upside down.

...and call it Wine++ or Wine#

Devarch · 2022-11-03 00:26:44

Welcome home, Lennart))

zapper · 2022-11-14 03:34:34

Camtaf wrote:

So, MS wants to go Linux, quite a good move on their part, (they've been there before), but why on earth put it on top of their 'Windows' system!
To be honest, I won't miss systemd or pulseaudio, I prefer not to use them anyway...
But....if Linux gets too much more commercialized, I'll be going to the BSDs for my computers.

If that happens and HyperbolaBSD isn't finished on an alpha level let alone a beta level, with the functionality I need most, then I will switch to OpenBSD.

PS, I don't need the same amount of "stuff" people need.

A word processor, web browser, maybe some lightweight emulators, qemu and a lightweight window manager, basically what Hyperbola has now... maybe minus the uxp stuff...

But that being said, I will try to wait as long as I can for now, given my support of them.

Not trying to offend... devuan is nice and all, but wayland is not something I want or need... dbus, I hate you... and redhat's other projects, whether they are made by poettering or someone more nefarious or as bad, etc...

It doesn't matter who it is, init freedom isn't going to be enough at this point.

Btw, Microsoft could go open source to the level I mentioned, but I don't know if they would, etc...

If they did what the other entity did, regarding blocking operating systems other then theirs to the same degree on all x86 hardware or others... I would be completely against said move.

Though they might at some point anyhow. So its a mixed bag what I think is best.

zapper · 2022-11-14 03:36:34

yeti wrote:

Camtaf wrote:
So, MS wants to go Linux, quite a good move on their part, (they've been there before), but why on earth put it on top of their 'Windows' system!
Maybe someday they'll flip it upside down.
Windows to become emulation layer atop Linux kernel, predicts Eric Raymond

On that note, I will just say:

Linux should always be the base and if microsoft is really needed for anyone, it should be loaded within linux.

Because linux would at least give some security even if you used friggin ubuntu or its derivatives.

Even with system dumb within it...

blackhole · 2022-11-14 14:56:44

I think ESR is way off...

WSL/WSL2 shows that MS is hellbent on keeping Windows as the installed OS and is researching and developing means to ensure that. UEFI and Secureboot were another means of creating a gradual slippery slope towards vendor lock in and greater influence and control by Microsoft. Business is business and "security" is often touted in sales patter. Unfortunately some are unable to separate the sales talk from the technical talk when it comes to those two. The "corporate Linux" vendors, signed in blood for Microsoft (of course they did, as they're MS partners, in bed with MS and have been for well over a decade) and unfortunately some Linux fans bought the whole "security" thing.

The idea that MS will eventually scrap Windows and rebuild from the ground up seems outlandish - I seriously doubt that will happen - for decades anyway. and then only as a matter of necessity. At this moment in time, it's a pipe dream.

Consider that Linux itself dates back to the early 90's.

Windows NT (i.e. the current Windows OS family) dates back to the late 80's and has it's roots in OS/2.

BSD is even older, late 70's, with the current 'BSD OS having their origins in 386BSD (early 90's).

macOS/iOS is based on parts of BSD and the Mach kernel - again 80's and 90's OS,

So, while it could be argued that Windows is getting "stale", so in fact are all of the other mainstream OS.

If Microsoft were to switch to Linux with some "Wine like" emulation layer, they would have to go through a massive retool, overhaul and exercise in retraining. The migration alone for their enterprise customers, would be a massive and highly disruptive undertaking, which could be catastrophic - for very little return. And that's before you even consider all of the hardware support implications. It might be great way of sending a big proportion of customers running to Red Hat/SUSE/Canonical. It won't happen.

Generally enterprise doesn't care if their MS exchange server now runs on Linux - they just need it to work and shareholders just want a return on their investment. While Windows may be crap, it's predictable crap for the sysadmins and other professionals who are paid to keep it running.

Last edited by blackhole (2022-11-14 14:59:03)

zapper · 2022-11-14 23:50:42

@blackhole

So you don't think they will become the next Google, down the road somewhere?
Btw, I am not doubting BSD, Linux and others being old, my point was not at all that they weren't.

I just thought Microsoft would want to have actual security while still being able to do the BS google or apple does, etc...

To put it bluntly, security without the privacy...

Although, this might be for the better anyhow...

Google is a huge fan of planned obsolescence anyhow... even more the microsoft... all you have to do is see the amount of products Google kills and how long they stay around compared to Microsoft products being killed and you will know what I mean.

This all being said, I don't think its a pipe dream at all.

But also, maybe in the near future it would be useful in some way?

But I doubt Microsoft would do this, without getting enough things into place to where it wouldn't be just as privacy invasive as their old system.

The main difference would be its ability to get malware probably would be much less...

Btw, I don't think Microsoft would base their new OS on linux due to the GPL issues that annoy them.

More than likely they would do what Apple did, only somewhat less restrictive with their specifications, but just as terrible as Google's security.

Long story short?

*If they did do this for some reason, I very much doubt, they would be unprepared to abuse it in a way similar to their old operating system. Thus, it would probably be largely similar and not a useful change for anyone.*

That would be my understanding... but I hope that I am wrong about the majority of these. With the exception of them considering open sourcing like Google, but obviously without any other "Google" changes.

*Rant done... *

Head_on_a_Stick · 2022-11-15 07:02:50

zapper wrote:

I just thought Microsoft would want to have actual security

The Windows desktop is already more secure than the Linux desktop.

Gonna post this again just to wind up blackhole:

https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/linux.html

Now with added Dark Mode!

blackhole · 2022-11-15 16:40:27

Heh... I'm not getting into that, plus I have no dog in the "Windows vs Linux security" race anyway.

@zapper: Yes I understand that your arguments were not based purely on one OS being older than the other - just pointing out that commercial reasons for a new "base" are lacking, in more ways than one.

Consider that Android is based on Linux (the kernel, to be specific about it) - and that google is actively developing it's own OS to replace that. If MS were to do the same, they would most likely base their efforts on something BSD licensed, if they were to open source it at all. Apple have done this, google are working on it and there's no reason to think that MS would do anything any different.

With respect to Android, that OS very specifically makes a clear separation between the GPLv2 kernel and every other part of the OS (which includes proprietary drivers and applications). MS would have to do the same, into to protect proprietary IP.

MS have their own hybrid micro kernel and built in many modern security features, protocols, etc and it would make no sense at all for them to abandon this and switch to the Linux kernel. There would be no benefits, certainly no security benefits in my view.

Windows is simply the No. 1 target for malware and most users are socially engineered into installing it, rather than it getting onto their system due to some exploit. Most properly configured Windows systems are actually quite secure these days, but there are a plethora of badly configured systems which are not - plus just as many reckless users, who create their own problems.

While the simplistic view that MS changing to a Linux base would make the OS more secure does seem credible, that would also mean the theoretical new Linux based MS OS being the new No. 1 target for malware... the kernel would be irrelevant - it would depend on how MS would design and implement the thing.

It does, in my view, work the other way round - ESR has it backwards, and WSL2 is actually the focus.

Last edited by blackhole (2022-11-15 16:46:19)

aluma · 2022-11-15 17:16:02

While we're here trying to figure out whose sandbox is better...
https://www.reuters.com/markets/currenc … 022-11-12/

zapper · 2022-11-21 03:30:14

@blackhole I think we can agree on one thing in particular, Microsoft is probably not just years, but possibly even a few decades away from making such a change, unless they feel like they have no choice, or they are far enough in their design that they could pull a "google" like move and still make as much as they made before.
I get the feeling you are basically saying that is a huge NO to both of those.

Btw, you can feel free to skip to the very bottom if you get bored, but these are some things I do think in general regarding bloatware, below:

As for the thing about BSD and Unixlike systems being targetted more, that would depend largely on if you use a linux system with a lot of overengineered crap in it, like systemd, dbus, pipewire, wayland, etc... basically stuff that is made to force vendor lock in aka... or if you use something without a lot of that stuff, or if you use a BSD or Linux distro which avoids adding that crap, etc...

Btw, saying microsoft is actually secure nowadays sounds like a joke to me. Although I suppose microsoft could have you connected to a server the moment your OS boots to protect you from other people's malware... obviously not theirs...

That being said, forced upgrades and no way to turn that function off and also, its stability, constant surveillance, backdoors, etc...

I get if you say they have better security then before and the fact you didn't mention privacy, because that would be completely pointless, but even then, I don't completely agree with your assessment on either of these two things.

if they switched to a BSD or Linux kernel, this would not be bad for all of them, just the ones that adopt the most bloatware, which would be huge damage to the Linux users, but for people who use OpenBSD, it would probably be just a tiny scratch given their standards on security.

My point being, the sandboxing features of OpenBSD are massive.
Although, even then, avoid the mainstream linux distros that absorb all the corporate bullcrap that redhat convinces people to adopt and you probably still have probably a thousand times better security. Hell, unless you have proprietary nonsense enabled with remote issues, you still would be better off and even if you had to do so, still better off.

This all being said, I don't think any of this is beneficial long term for Linux... unless it forces the majority of distros to change how things are done similar to Hyperbola.

Which, let's face it, would only happen if actual hell broke loose on most computers using Linux due to the redhat bloat and it could be proven, etc...

to say there is less than 1% of all this, would be laughable... more like less than 0.0001% chance...

To put it simply:

"@zapper: Yes I understand that your arguments were not based purely on one OS being older than the other - just pointing out that commercial reasons for a new "base" are lacking, in more ways than one."

I agree with you on the commercial reasons part, mostly because they would probably have had some info leaked by now, etc... if this was true.

seeker · 2022-11-21 12:28:09

Isn't that the same path taken by Miguel de Icaza who pushed Mono inclusion?

blackhole · 2022-11-21 17:18:06

de Icaza (gnome project founder) and Nat Friedman, both former FOSS developers who worked for Ximian (bought by Novell) and then Xamarin (Microsoft subsidiary), both worked or still work for Microsoft.

Friedman still works for MS, as CEO of github.

It's easy to criticise them, but few software developers work for nothing and when given the chance of high earnings and improved standard of living, will take it.

In a sense, everyone who works for the Linux Foundation, works at least partially for MS and other "Big Tech", as they primarily fund the foundation. The 'BSDs also rely heavily on corporate donations.

However, the acquisition of Xamarin by MS is closely tied up with the events surrounding the Novell acquisition by Attachmate, followed by the acquisition of Attachmate by Micro Focus.

zapper · 2022-11-25 04:31:47

blackhole wrote:

de Icaza (gnome project founder) and Nat Friedman, both former FOSS developers who worked for Ximian (bought by Novell) and then Xamarin (Microsoft subsidiary), both worked or still work for Microsoft.
Friedman still works for MS, as CEO of github.
It's easy to criticise them, but few software developers work for nothing and when given the chance of high earnings and improved standard of living, will take it.
In a sense, everyone who works for the Linux Foundation, works at least partially for MS and other "Big Tech", as they primarily fund the foundation. The 'BSDs also rely heavily on corporate donations.
However, the acquisition of Xamarin by MS is closely tied up with the events surrounding the Novell acquisition by Attachmate, followed by the acquisition of Attachmate by Micro Focus.

To be honest, of late, I realized something I never thought I would ever believe...

BSDs more or less except for refusing GPL application code for non-system-apps, is bad, but otherwise, I think they are more than 80% right.

Ironically, they provide more "freedom" then most linux distros... sadly, if you don't give them what they want, they will manipulate the system to find other ways to wreck the system, way more, I might add.

Don't mistake me, copyleft licenses are fine, for non core libraries and non core packages. But the moment people go too far with it, corporations seem to always find a way to manipulate the system in their favour.

Alas, for big projects, they usually win sooner or later.

Only dedicated distros like Hyperbola can survive this problem, but even then, there are other issues that can happen.

The formula I mention though? Its here:

Freedom is meaningless if you cannot have privacy
Privacy is meaningless if security is poor
Security usually will die, if things get too bloated over time, little by little.

OpenBSD may have some non-free stuff in it, or unknown licenses within it, but it matters more the risks of that unknown stuff then how much of it.

If one has 100 issues of 10, meaning extreme danger level, but the other has 10000 but they are like a light yellow which we will say is a 3 point score, choose the first one always.

Also. in general, they fix their security issues fast.

blackhole · 2022-11-28 13:22:44

zapper wrote:

To be honest, of late, I realized something I never thought I would ever believe...
BSDs more or less except for refusing GPL application code for non-system-apps, is bad, but otherwise, I think they are more than 80% right.

Refusing the GPL'd code, prevents the non GPL'd code from becoming "contaminated" plus - GPL is regarded by some as a viral license.

zapper wrote:

Ironically, they provide more "freedom" then most linux distros... sadly, if you don't give them what they want, they will manipulate the system to find other ways to wreck the system, way more, I might add.
Don't mistake me, copyleft licenses are fine, for non core libraries and non core packages. But the moment people go too far with it, corporations seem to always find a way to manipulate the system in their favour.

Hence the school of thought that GPL isn't a good thing and why some 'BSDs have policies which exclude it from the base system.

You are actually stating what I have been saying for at least the last 10 years - that GPL is not some anti corporate or anti capitalist safeguard, which prevents corporate involvement/takeover. As you have noted, corporations have infiltrated free software and simply pay the people / fund the projects and in doing so achieve control and can steer those projects as they see fit. This also means that"unfunded" projects lack/lose developers and die. One could argue that, if the code were under,e.g. BSD 2 clause, they would just throw some donations at the project, walk away and do their own thing. Who can say for sure. I think that horse has bolted.

All GPL really does in a nutshell is seek to prevent a company (or an individual in fact) from taking code and "turning it proprietary". That's really it.

And when corporations do develop "free" code? They use the non copyleft (permissive) licenses wherever possible (for example, code developed by AMD or Intel for the Linux DRM/KMS graphics stack is mostly permissive licensed.

If they do use GPL - you can bet they have done so for a reason, in that there is a business motivation for releasing the code under a restrictive copy left licence (having no option but to release the code, but at the same seeking to prevent a competitor from using the code without also having to release their own derivative works).

There is another valid argument however - costs. Despite Microsoft propaganda of the early 00s, Linux is a cheaper alternative for e.g. IBM or HPE than developing their own in house UNIX. They essentially get the same "solution" they had to pay many millions of dollars to develop, for what amounts to peanuts. So you can already see that it's very much in the corporate interest to "hijack" projects such as the Linux kernel and steer them to suit a corporate agenda.

zapper wrote:

OpenBSD may have some non-free stuff in it, or unknown licenses within it, but it matters more the risks of that unknown stuff then how much of it.

I'm almost certain OpenBSD contains no "non-free" stuff - in fact there are strict policies with regards to that.

FreeBSD, I'm not so sure about. I do know they have signed NDAs in the past and I know their focus is on providing something that works rather than something primarily provided to meet some ideological objective. But yes, despite this - one could argue that FreeBSD is "more free" than Linux as it is not funded and controlled by a consortium of "Big Tech", but instead relies on donors (some of those also being "Big Tech"), who throw some money at it. That is ironic, considering all the criticism leveled at FreeBSD over the years by GNU evangelists (while corporations crept in and stole almost everything from under their noses).

No project is perfect or "better" however. I can see a lot of problems in many FOSS projects. It seems that corporate influence, even something like those nefarious "CoC" documents are everywhere these days.

Last edited by blackhole (2022-11-28 14:17:23)

The officially official Devuan Forum!

#1 2022-07-08 01:22:41

Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#2 2022-07-08 06:29:59

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#3 2022-07-08 17:51:18

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#4 2022-07-09 06:44:11

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#5 2022-07-16 21:58:55

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#6 2022-08-06 13:30:14

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#7 2022-09-24 14:12:06

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#8 2022-09-24 14:14:27

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#9 2022-10-15 04:24:40

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#10 2022-10-15 09:07:54

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#11 2022-10-15 17:06:21

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#12 2022-10-16 02:45:54

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#13 2022-11-03 00:26:44

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#14 2022-11-14 03:34:34

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#15 2022-11-14 03:36:34

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#16 2022-11-14 14:56:44

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#17 2022-11-14 23:50:42

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#18 2022-11-15 07:02:50

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#19 2022-11-15 16:40:27

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#20 2022-11-15 17:16:02

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#21 2022-11-21 03:30:14

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#22 2022-11-21 12:28:09

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#23 2022-11-21 17:18:06

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#24 2022-11-25 04:31:47

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

#25 2022-11-28 13:22:44

Re: Lennart Poettering (Systemd) Lands at Microsoft After Leaving Red Hat

Board footer