The maintainers of the Ubuntu Linux distribution are now rewriting GNU Coreutils in Rust. Instead of using the GPLv3 license, which is designed to make sure that the freedoms and rights of the user of the program are preserved and always respected over everything else, the new version is going to be released using the very permissible or “permissive” (non-reciprocal) MIT license, which allows creating proprietary closed-source forks of the program.
There will surely be small incompatibilities - either intentional or accidental - between the Rust rewrite of coreutils and the GNU/C version. If the Rust version becomes popular - and it probably will, if Ubuntu starts using it - the Rust people will start pushing their own versions of higher level programs that are only compatible with the Rust version of coreutils. They will most probably also spam commits to already existing programs making them incompatible with the GNU/C version of coreutils. That way either everyone will be forced into using the MIT-licensed Rust version of coreutils, or the Linux userland becomes even more broken than it already is because now we have again two incompatible sets of runtime functions that conflict with one another. Either way, both outcomes benefit the corporations that produce proprietary software.
Compare also how leaders of Canonical/Ubuntu have ties to Microsoft, and how the Canonical employee who leads the push to rewrite coreutils as non-GPL-licensed Rust software has spent years working for the British Army, where he “Architected and built multiple high-end bespoke Electronic Surveillance capabilities”, by his own proud admission.
Why did you editorialize the title so much?
So the problem isn’t Rust but the license. Probably the community should take it upon themselves to write an AGPLv3 rust version of the coreutils.
If the Rust version is released under MIT, simply fork it, rename it, and release under (A)GPL and ensure the community only uses that version. Sorted.
Wait, can’t this presumed
weapon of mass rustificationcoreutils clone be also re-published under GPL?That’s what the comment is saying, yes
If the Rust version is released under MIT, simply fork it, rename it, and release under (A)GPL
"(…) Dr. Stallman notes that he cannot comment much about technical aspects of Rust, but he remains concerned (for a year already) about the trademark aspects. He is still receiving no clarification or assurances on the matter. Previously he suggested forking it and calling it something like “crust” (in a talk or a session he did with several Brazilian hackers). " (via)
@fartsparkles @onlinepersona Except that the MIT version will get bells and whistles that folk can’t do without.
You just track the MIT repo and automate the patching and releasing under a different license each time the MIT repo updates.
@fartsparkles Me? That could turn out to be a full-time job which I’ll leave to someone else, thank you.
Sorry, it has to be you. You are the chosen one.
@fartsparkles 🎼 You were so lonesome, you needed a man 🎵
Someone to talk to, well I understand 🎵
That’s only natural…
But why does it have to be me? 🎵🎼 It had to be you 🎵
Wonderful you 🎵
It had to be you 🎵
A lot of presumption:
will surely be
If the Rust version becomes popular
It probably will
the Rust people will start pushing
They will most probably also
Does not a solid conclusion make:
That way. the Linux userland becomes even more broken than it already is because now we have again two incompatible sets of…
How will we stave off ecosystem takeover if not by taking its early signs seriously? At the start of every case of “Stallman Was Right” was a lot of presumption that, in the eyes of many, did not make a solid conclusion.
Wow you can tell from the first paragraph that this isn’t worth reading. I read it… just out of curiousity…
For some reason the whole discussion around this Rust/C/Linux/GNU/thing is mostly focused around superficial and irrelevant things like the sexualities and genders of the Rust people
Err…
Rust people seem to be focused mostly on identity politics and dividing people into groups that are then supposed to fight each other. As I wrote earlier, I didn’t invent the term “Rust people” myself - those people themselves identify as “Rust people”, which is not a good thing. I code mostly in C and assembly, but I certainly don’t identify as a “C person”. I can also write other programming languages, and I would even learn Rust if it wasn’t such a horrible Trojan horse that is clearly designed to destroy computing freedom.
… yeah. I can confirm he has zero sane points. Let’s not give this lunatic any credence.
fucking rusties are at it again…
This isn’t a rust issue…this is a canonical using a less than ideal license issue on their rust code.
deleted by creator
