Linux

66392 readers

377 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 7 years ago

MODERATORS

nooter692@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

122

Rust Coreutils cp Ended Up Breaking Ubuntu Image Builds With Latest Incompatibility (www.phoronix.com)

submitted 1 week ago by SocialistVibes01@lemmy.ml to c/linux@lemmy.ml

105 comments fedilink hide all child comments

What an absolute shitshow

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] pineapple@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The current GNU coreutils have been C for decades, and I am not aware of an instance where this was a limiting factor. The GNU coreutils can still be bundled with proprietary software. Just like some Linux distributions used to come bundled with proprietary Nvidia drivers.

Can you possibly find an example where the Licensing the rust coreutils under the GPL would be an issue? Or actually any example at all of where using the GPL is a bad thing?

MIT License isn’t giving up Open Source, as all Open Source projects with MIT prove it.

I literally just described an example of it giving up open source. Any project under the MIT (https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:Expat) license can become proprietary at any time and all development is no longer open source! How is my example of apple using FreeBSD without contributing not an example of giving up open source? If you would like I can find more examples. So far you havn't given me any for your own evidence but I would like some so I can understand your argument better.

Also applogies for the late replies, I hope you don't mind too much.