> Omarchy has practically unlimited tokens

And yet they have a total of zero upstreamed PRs, and haven't fixed enormous and glaring issues like PSCI control either.

It's almost as if the parent is correct, and Apple's ARM architecture isn't standardized enough for ordinary models to blindly reverse-engineer without documentation. If tokens were the only constraint on supporting Apple Silicon, we'd have reversed the entire SOC device tree years ago. Alas...

▲

tw1984 a day ago | parent | next [-]

upstreamed PR means nothing in 2026. I couldn't care less when some maintainer are just so political, still remember the rust in kernel drama a couple of years ago? why great work have to get approvals from those people?

▲

cromka a day ago | parent | next [-]

Sure, let's see how the hardware you enjoy in November behaves in March after they rebase the kernel to 7.5.

	▲	orangecat 18 hours ago \| parent [-]
		If an LLM can write working code in the first place, it can almost certainly port it to an updated kernel. I first got my M4 Pro running Linux under 7.2, and moving to 7.3 took Claude about 15 minutes.

▲

bigyabai 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Upstreamed PRs are the only thing people run. You can whine, sling ad-hominem at maintainers and recompile a custom kernel for every minor version bump, but nobody else is going to. If you don't go through the upstream, your code is never being run at-scale.

▲

KetoManx64 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> And yet they have a total of zero upstreamed PRs, and haven't fixed enormous and glaring issues like PSCI control either.

Why should I care about if they upstream their patches or not? I have a working M3 macbook that runs Omarchy, why do I care that it's in the mainline Linux kernel? My GrapheneOS phone doesn't run mainstream Linux kernel, but it does the job that I need it to do.

	▲	cromka a day ago \| parent [-]
		Just read other people explaining this in this thread.