this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
49 points (100.0% liked)

Framework Laptop Community

57 readers
5 users here now

Related links:

Related communities:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
uthredii@lemmy.ml
uthredii@programming.dev
49
Linux Mint and Framework Laptops join forces (linuxiac.com)
submitted 1 week ago by TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip to c/framework@lemmy.ml
9 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/21664063

Linux Mint and Framework Laptops Join Forces

The October 2024 edition of Linux Mint’s Monthly News brings exciting updates, including a significant announcement about collaboration with Framework Laptops, having potential to advance Mint’s compatibility with hardware designed with flexibility, repairability, and sustainability in mind.

For those unfamiliar, unlike most traditional laptops, which are often difficult or impossible to repair or upgrade, Framework laptops are built to be user-friendly, making it easy to replace or upgrade components. This modular approach extends the laptop’s lifespan and promotes sustainability by reducing e-waste.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] renegadespork@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 week ago (4 children)

This is nice, but wouldn't it make more sense to work with the Linux kernel so their drivers work on any distro?

[–] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago

It is not about the drivers, framework has most likely not the capability to develop drivers for their Laptops, it is the manufacturer's job. All framework can do is selecting parts that are already supported by the kernel. Also a driver can take several years until it actually gets into a not rolling release distro like Ubuntu or mint since they do not use the newest kernel.

This collab is more about making sure, that when you install those distros everything works out of the box which is not a given, depending on the compile flags for the kernel they used or what packages are coming installed by default.

load more comments (3 replies)