this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
164 points (94.6% liked)

Linux

9272 readers
188 users here now

Welcome to c/linux!

Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!

Rules:

  1. Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.

  2. Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.

  3. Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.

  4. No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.

  5. No NSFW adult content

  6. Follow general lemmy guidelines.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 4 points 13 hours ago

Literally why? Not even criticizing rust but the GNU core utils are easily some of the most reliable and documented software tools ever written.

Not to mention, looks like the rust core utils are MIT and not GPL.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Archlinux usually is a bit more reasonable. I don’t understand the forcing. Just makes me love it (archlinux) more!

[–] sik0fewl 54 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I can finally stop calling it GNU/Linux.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 2 days ago (2 children)
[–] masterofn001 24 points 2 days ago
[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago

Oh good God, Linux is finally old enough to start rusting?! And on BOTH ENDS?

vigorously shakes can of WD-40

[–] pglpm 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What about licences and FOSS?

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

According to the video it's MIT licence, and they discuss the risk of such a licence vs coreutils usage of the GPL

[–] pglpm 19 points 1 day ago

This worries me indeed.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Rust is good, rare Ubuntu W. Now stop with the forced use of snaps.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

You think this is a win, but is just another step in the enshittification.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Wait is this their way to break compatibility with old binaries so that you're forced to use snap?

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 day ago

They're steadily climbing the test suit:

test coverage

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 days ago

The uutils should be compatible so I don't think so

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Check out our new Coreutils! (Snap required)

Seriously though I'm just imagining that Coreutils are now going to be dependent on snap.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 33 points 2 days ago (2 children)

That's extremely unexpected.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The GNU utils weren't written by Canonical so they were doomed from the start.

[–] avidamoeba 56 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Not to worry, they'll ship 'em via snap.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 days ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

More likely they will make them dependent on snap so you can't remove snap without breaking the system.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Because why? I can expect a very niche distro like Cachy do it but not a big project with a serious market share.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Canonical has a long history of doing wacky shit that nobody asked for though. Unity, upstart, snap, probably other things that I'm not thinking of

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Unity at least didn't break anything, and you still had a choice in choosing desktop environment.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

Unity was great, though. Ubuntu took a hit going back to customized gnome

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Is there any actual benefit ?

[–] [email protected] 49 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Code written in Rust has been shown to have significantly fewer security vulnerabilities than code written in C. Distributions like Ubuntu ship a lot of security updates, so by switching to Rust-based utils, they can reduce their workload in the long run.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 18 hours ago

But looking at the security vulnerability records of gnu coreutils that wasn't really needed. There were like a handful in the last 15 years... So I don't really see a need or benefit here.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 days ago

Ubuntu ship a lot of security updates

After introducing the Pro I don't think so.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well the rust project is MIT licensed, so definitely not.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I thought MIT licensing was a good thing?? What am i missing??

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 hours ago

In large part it's a matter of opinions and different perspectives. A common consensus is libraries should be MIT and entire applications should be GPL. However, this is not held by all community members.

Overall, Rust is easier to read and harder to fuck up, so there's one argument in favour if it, in terms of community engagement. For an example of this, compare ls.c by Apple, GNU, FreeBSd and OpenBSD.

On the other hand, I should imagine most people simply install ripgrep and fd anyway.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

The success of FOSS can in large part be attributed to copyleft licenses like the GPL. Without the protections of copyleft clauses, software just gets exploited by large corporations and end users are locked out. For just one example, if GNU software had used MIT, the entire free router movement (i.e ddwrt, openwrt and co.) would probably not exist today.

See: Free Software Foundation, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc..

Edit: actually, I think by the time of this specific lawsuit, the sources for wrt54g were already released after community pressure, this article details the history a bit better.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Just security and hype afaik.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (16 children)

It's been proven faster. That's all I personally know.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

This is the Linux community's Sophie's choice.

load more comments
view more: next ›