this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2025
77 points (73.3% liked)

Linux

51892 readers
854 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

Related Communities

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

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] azvasKvklenko@sh.itjust.works 12 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

What you’re referring to as Linux is actually Uutils/Linux…

[–] superkret@feddit.org -4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] ArsonButCute@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Stevchard Jollman is making me really uncomfortable.

[–] superkret@feddit.org 1 points 10 hours ago

It's supposed to be Richmark Shuttleman

[–] feanpoli@lemmy.ml 78 points 1 day ago (4 children)

While shifting to Rust might be a good idea for improving safety and performance, adopting the MIT license represents a fundamental change that will enable large tech companies to develop and distribute proprietary software based on the new MIT-licensed Core Utilities. This shift moves away from the original vision of the project which was to ensure that the software remains free and open as enshrined in the GPL's copyleft principles. The permissive nature of the MIT license also will increase fragmentation, as it allows proprietary forks that diverge from the main project. This could weaken the community-driven development model and potentially lead to incompatible versions of the software.

[–] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 2 points 3 hours ago

This is stupid,, businesses just use busybox and move on.

Nobody is freaking out that their smart toaster doesn't have the full version of troff.

[–] WarmApplePieShrek@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Open source has been captured and corporatized.

But Ubuntu has always been extremely corporate.

That doesn't mean we should make it easier for them, if anything that means we need a V4 of the GPL that addresses and combats that

[–] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Do large tech companies contribute a lot to the GPL coreutils?

[–] feanpoli@lemmy.ml 16 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

Yes, they do. The GPL's copyleft clause requires companies to release the source code of any modifications they distribute, ensuring contributions back to the community. The MIT license, however, allows proprietary forks without this obligation. In other terms, the MIT license is effectively permitting companies to "jump out" of the open-source ecosystem they make use of.

[–] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org -1 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

I know, but do they? Has big tech contributed to the code base significantly for coreutils specifically? sed and awk or ls has been the same as long as I remember, utf8 support has been added, but I doubt apple or google was behind that.

[–] feanpoli@lemmy.ml 7 points 13 hours ago

As far as I’m aware, contributions from major corporations to GNU Core Utilities specifically (e.g. sed, awk, ls) have been limited. Most development has historically come from the GNU community and individual contributors. For example, UTF-8 support was likely added through community efforts rather than corporate involvement. However, as these corporations increasingly back projects moving away from GNU and the GPL, their intent to leverage the permissive nature of the MIT license becomes evident. Should 'uutils' gain widespread adoption, it would inevitably lead to a significant shift in governance.

[–] crimsonpoodle@pawb.social 4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Intel does a lot, by which I mean they sponsor people to do it. Changing user facing utils is a bad idea as it breaks things. Although I don’t really keep up with it I know they’ve been changing things like the number of levels of pages etc, over time moving to sysd instead of init and stuff but the latter was a decade ago now. You can probably trace the maintainer to who sponsors them from here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel_version_history

[–] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 11 hours ago

Kernel yes, but coreutils? It's ls, sleep, who, pwd, and so on.

[–] Abnorc@lemm.ee 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

If this happened, would Ubuntu based operating systems be impacted as well? I might start to learn Debian or LMDE if so.

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 5 points 15 hours ago

MIT license is still open source, so Ubuntu based operating systems can still be open source. The problem is that this makes it less needed that they have to be. However most current projects will probably stay proper open source projects and likely continue to use a better license.

[–] krolden@lemmy.ml 6 points 16 hours ago

Fuck Ubuntu fuck MIT fuck everything

[–] adrianhooves@lemmy.today 2 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

this means ubuntu is no longer a linux distro?? because if linux hardcore people think that linux is kernel+gnu then that means both android and ubuntu are not distros!! i believe the opposite, linux kernel? linux distro of course!! and ubuntu is the android of linux distros even if android is a linux distro itself

[–] Drito@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 hours ago

IMHO distros share the same apps. The defaults can differ, the implementations too but the user can install apps that are on other distros.

[–] JustVik@lemmy.ml 7 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Ubuntu is no longer GNU/Linux distro. Linux is just a kernel.:)

[–] lengau@midwest.social 1 points 9 hours ago

It using glibc still distinguishes it as more of a GNU system than, say, Alpine.

[–] WarmApplePieShrek@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 12 hours ago

Ubuntu already wasn't a linux distro nor is android. They're different operating system which use the Linux kernel.

[–] mactan@lemmy.ml 62 points 1 day ago (1 children)

genuinely my only problem with it is the license. I really hate how much stuff is mit or apache now. I've seen some really nice projects get taken over and privatized in the last few years and nobody has learned

[–] bunitor@lemmy.eco.br 20 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

sadly, i think that's exactly the reason why so many gnu coreutils/libc/compiler competitors keep croping up: people want to get rid of the gpl as much as possible. if they could replace the linux kernel with a non gpl variant they would

not that the people creating the projects necessarily have this intention, but the projects are certainly being picked up and sponsored mainly for that reason

Imo thats also why its devolped as well, people genuenly like permissive licenses because apparently coporate leeches arent an issue to them.

[–] Mwa@lemm.ee 26 points 1 day ago

Can't wait for proprietary apps to not work on distros that still use gnu core utilities.

[–] adrianhooves@lemmy.today 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

oh no!! wait but that means that xubuntu will still be around?? because as far as i know, xfce has some elements that use agpl and that would interfere with some rust code and would hurt xubuntu. would that make xubuntu stop existing?

[–] fxdave@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 hours ago

do they interfere?

[–] that_leaflet@lemmy.world 81 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Clickbait. The VP Engineering for Ubuntu made a post that he was looking into using the Rust utils for Ubuntu and has been daily driving them and encouraged others to try

It’s by no means certain this will be done.

[–] 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 day ago

Clickbait

With mental outlaw, it's usually that or ragebait, to rile up his audience.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Clickbait. The VP Engineering for Ubuntu made a post that he was looking into using the Rust utils for Ubuntu and has been daily driving them and encouraged others to try

It’s by no means certain this will be done.

Here is that post. It isn't certain to happen, but he doesn't only say that he is daily driving them. He says his goal is to make them the default in 25.10:

My immediate goal is to make uutils’ coreutils implementation the default in Ubuntu 25.10, and subsequently in our next Long Term Support (LTS) release, Ubuntu 26.04 LTS, if the conditions are right.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] olosta@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

One of the main developers presented this project at FOSDEM.

https://fosdem.org/2025/schedule/event/fosdem-2025-6196-rewriting-the-future-of-the-linux-essential-packages-in-rust-/

(He is a Mozilla employee but made a point to tell it was not affiliated with Mozilla and was working on it on his spare time)

Then it's not too late to tell him it must be GPL.

load more comments
view more: next ›