The Linux Thread - The Autist's OS of Choice

[x3firehexx]

But is it even FOSS at that point?

I mean... it's free, it's also Open source, granted, being able to contribute your code is a big part of FOSS as a concept, but it's not strictly mandatory

 

[analrapist]

being able to contribute your code is a big part of FOSS as a concept, but it's not strictly mandatory

Projects are fussier than I think most people realize. A good, clean PR that resolves an issue is far from guaranteed to be merged.

 

[⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛]

Given enough time, politics will seep into any popular space. I strongly believe such an apolitical space is impossible to achieve in FOSS without extreme gatekeeping. E.g. SQLite's development model where a small group op developers write all the code and release it in the public domain while not allowing any form of contribution by outsiders. But is it even FOSS at that point?

I am not aware of Stallman giving a judgement as to whether SQLite is developed in the spirit of free software. However, he has opined on the principles of free software, and 'copyleft' vs. 'non-copyleft'.

He has (rightly) criticized releases of software under public domain or MIT/BSD style licenses as opposed to copyleft free software licenses. Public domain, and MIT/BSD, allow commercial entities to embrace and extend the likes of SQLite, and refuse to provide their (incompatible) code to users (and other developers). That may be 'free software' at some minimal definition, but does not protect software freedom and is not copyleft.

One suspects he would also recognize that the model of not accepting outside contributions under a copyright assignment regime is 'suspicious'- everyone knows the SQLite developers do this so they can make companies that want new features in a reliable way pay them to do the development. In fairness, databases are pretty patent-encumbered, but I'm sure if the SQLite chap was mainly concerned with that, he could make some kind of deal with Apple or another big user to take on patent litigation in some sort of quid-prod-quo, or raise money in some other way to cover legal review expenses.

This is suspect in the same way that Poettring refusing to accept my commits where every module in systemd is deleted is harmful to improving software.

You could ask Prof Dr. Stallman and he will probably provide a response but he probably has better things to do.

 

[x3firehexx]

Projects are fussier than I think most people realize. A good, clean PR that resolves an issue is far from guaranteed to be merged.

Because no one can agree on shit, this is the biggest issue with community Foss projects, no one can agree on anything, so everyone spends their time doing they better "X" thing, even tough the current x thing works well enough, so they waste their time barking about who's thing is the better thing, even tough none of the alternative solution work well, so it would be better to Just like move on to something else

 

[Unstable Diffusion]

Switching to Linux in matter of months, anything I should brace for impact? Willing to do it since the experience has improved a lot (or so I'm been reading, thanks Valve) and anything that is not compatible can just be run with Wine or that one direct kernel software I cannot remember its name of to run Windows .
Note that this isn't my first rodeo with Linux, every single time before I absolutely despised it, but it will be the first time I use it in a personal machine that I can make it my own so I find it less aids inducing.

 

[Susanna]

Switching to Linux in matter of months, anything I should brace for impact? Willing to do it since the experience has improved a lot (or so I'm been reading, thanks Valve) and anything that is not compatible can just be run with Wine or that one direct kernel software I cannot remember its name of to run Windows .
Note that this isn't my first rodeo with Linux, every single time before I absolutely despised it, but it will be the first time I use it in a personal machine that I can make it my own so I find it less aids inducing.

Welcome, then. What I would suggest is you start with a simple and popular distro like Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop (KDE is super customisable, out of the box it's rather similar to Windows but you can easily turn it into a mac-like or just make your own perfect desktop with it. Most important is that you ask for help if there's something you don't understand and you can't find a decent guide after a few minutes of searching, I think a lot of the people who try Linux and then flee back to Windows or Mac do so because they were simply unable to get something to work, and couldn't find comprehensive and understandable information on how to do it. Pretty much the only things Linux can't do well right now is photo/video editing, where the tools that do exist simply suck, or CAD, where the tools just don't exist in the first place.

To run Windows VMs, I recommend you look into virt-manager. It's an easy to use frontend to the built-in kernel virtual machine, and because it uses libvirt as a backend, if you want to do something more complex in the future, like for example GPU passthrough with looking-glass or seamless virtual machines that start automatically, you can write those scripts using libvirt and your existing virtual machines rather than have to start over and learn something new. But virt-manager itself is basically like Windows Hyper-V, Parallels, or virtualbox, you'll find it very intuitive if you've used one of those before.

 

[Frederica Bernkastel]

There was a lot of talk about AMD open sourcing their GPU firmware in early 2024, but nothing came of it? There isn't a lot of libre firmware these days. Even Coreboot is weird considering they still have laptops with the UEFI free of firmware, but then include it with closed source intel drivers.

 

[Marvin]

Prof Dr. Stallman

Ethical pederasty defender (don't @ me)

 

[dame dudi jench]

Public domain, and MIT/BSD, allow commercial entities to embrace and extend the likes of SQLite, and refuse to provide their (incompatible) code to users (and other developers). That may be 'free software' at some minimal definition, but does not protect software freedom and is not copyleft.

GPL-3 is such a pissy temper tantrum. The reason there is any kind of functional open source ecosystem is because large tech companies contribute so much to open source projects. GPL-3 is an attempt to keep businesses out of the open source ecosystem. That benefits no one. If a company has some proprietary service it offers wrapped around some GPL-2 modules, nothing is stopping you from creating an open-source competitor and those modules are likely to be improved upon bc of their use in proprietary services.

 

[nut butter]

Switching to Linux in matter of months, anything I should brace for impact? Willing to do it since the experience has improved a lot (or so I'm been reading, thanks Valve) and anything that is not compatible can just be run with Wine or that one direct kernel software I cannot remember its name of to run Windows .
Note that this isn't my first rodeo with Linux, every single time before I absolutely despised it, but it will be the first time I use it in a personal machine that I can make it my own so I find it less aids inducing.

I would say you should expect to not really like Linux for a significant amount of time, like maybe a month or two, before it feels normal. It's going to be kind of like getting a cavity filled or breaking in new shoes where it just doesn't feel right and then one day you will just be past that breaking in period and using Linux will feel like just using a computer from then on.

Spoiler: Wrote too much.

I think that break in period is mostly due to getting annoyed that you can't do "simple things." Linux isn't Windows or macOS, so some things are just fundamentally different in Linux and when you butt up against things that you know exactly how to do in other systems it gets really frustrating and is probably the most annoying part about Linux. Everyone has got so much experience dealing with the annoying aspects of their usual operating system that all those little workarounds have become muscle memory and nobody remembers what a nightmare it was to get a grip on it for the first couple months.

People who are really into Linux usually either had to push through that break in period due to school or work, or they were ideologically motivated by Richard Stallman or wanted to look like a hacker. If you don't have any motivation to learn how to use the system it's going to be hard to resist the temptation to go back, so I think trying to really make the system your own and make lots of keyboard shortcuts and stuff like that is a really good idea to keep using Linux fun.

Also, try to do things without WINE as much as possible. You'll have to troubleshoot WINE issues at the same time you're trying to learn a new system and it's just going to be harder than it needs to be.

 

[⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛]

GPL-3 is such a pissy temper tantrum. The reason there is any kind of functional open source ecosystem is because large tech companies contribute so much to open source projects. GPL-3 is an attempt to keep businesses out of the open source ecosystem. That benefits no one. If a company has some proprietary service it offers wrapped around some GPL-2 modules, nothing is stopping you from creating an open-source competitor and those modules are likely to be improved upon bc of their use in proprietary services.

How does Andy Jassy's HIV-infused cum taste?

 

[Lapsus of the bepsus]

Poettring refusing to accept my commits where every module in systemd is deleted is harmful to improving software.

faggotring being in any position to choose what does or doesnt get merged is unironically harmful to improving software. half of userland now has hidden dependencies on his globohomo backed blackbox shitware
in an ideal world he would do the equivalent of accepting your commit but to himself and irl

 

[Heliantheae]

The number of black people who decided to learn how to code and master git once they learned LibreWolf is no longer using "master" for the main branch is zero. It's purely performative.

It's funny how "master" as a name for an SVC branch is such a problem while "scrum master", a title given to an actual person, is all OK. It's almost like these cowards lack the spine to cause issues with their employers in real life.

 

[The Ugly One]

He has (rightly) criticized releases of software under public domain or MIT/BSD style licenses as opposed to copyleft free software licenses. Public domain, and MIT/BSD, allow commercial entities to embrace and extend the likes of SQLite, and refuse to provide their (incompatible) code to users (and other developers). That may be 'free software' at some minimal definition, but does not protect software freedom and is not copyleft.

And yet, the only reason gcc and Linux are household names in IT world is they made massive exceptions to copyleft for system headers. When he does it, it's fine, but when anyone else does it, we're betraying some holy movement.

 

[AmpleApricots]

And yet, the only reason gcc and Linux are household names in IT world is they made massive exceptions to copyleft for system headers. When he does it, it's fine, but when anyone else does it, we're betraying some holy movement.

Why are you kicking the linux thread again, can't you see that it's already a complete wasteland

 

[Lapsus of the bepsus]

massive exceptions to copyleft for system headers.

you cant reasonably opt out of using those headers so not having that exception made it effectively illegal to compile proprietary software with gcc. keep in mind the change was introduced in the mid 2000s when linux was finally gaining traction but was notorious for driver support issues, and most users would rather have proprietary drivers than no drivers. his stance on non-copyleft really isnt as radical as you think, the link in the post you quoted even contains a recommendation for a non-copyleft license when you want to use one, and 80% of the article is an unrelated rant about a mandatory advertising clause in old bsd licenses and people causing a clusterfuck with it.

 

[teriyakiburns]

you cant reasonably opt out of using those headers so not having that exception made it effectively illegal to compile proprietary software with gcc. keep in mind the change was introduced in the mid 2000s when linux was finally gaining traction but was notorious for driver support issues, and most users would rather have proprietary drivers than no drivers. his stance on non-copyleft really isnt as radical as you think, the link in the post you quoted even contains a recommendation for a non-copyleft license when you want to use one, and 80% of the article is an unrelated rant about a mandatory advertising clause in old bsd licenses and people causing a clusterfuck with it.

Besides which, such headers (along with APIs and other interface descriptions) weren't traditionally considered copyrightable until 2021, when Oracle got itself a favourable ruling in Oracle v Google by hitting retry on the courts until it got a compliant judge. The "exception" was pro-forma acknowledgement of the reality at the time it was made and a clarification against claims that userspace applications using system calls was equivalent to mingling GPL and non-GPL code. Given the lengths Oracle went to claim the copyright over APIs, and the lengths SCO was going until its case imploded (they claimed the linux headers were their copyright code), it's a good thing the exception was made, because otherwise the interface problem would have been used to kill Linux. It would also heave wrought havoc in the industry at large if syscalls could be claimed as copyright. The legal status of every piece of software in existence would be called into question.

 

[The Ugly One]

you cant reasonably opt out of using those headers so not having that exception made it effectively illegal to compile proprietary software with gcc. keep in mind the change was introduced in the mid 2000s when linux was finally gaining traction but was notorious for driver support issues, and most users would rather have proprietary drivers than no drivers. his stance on non-copyleft really isnt as radical as you think, the link in the post you quoted even contains a recommendation for a non-copyleft license when you want to use one, and 80% of the article is an unrelated rant about a mandatory advertising clause in old bsd licenses and people causing a clusterfuck with it.

Yes, that's the whole point. If Richard Stallman had eaten his own dog food, Linux and gcc would only be slightly less obscure than TempleOS and HolyC. I remember the fanatics back in the early 00s preaching that copyleft would take over everything because expert programmers would build so much top-flight, mission-critical software using it that commercial software companies would have to turn free or die. You'd be faced with either including a header from this awesome, super-cool GPL library and infecting you code base, or just not having access to whatever amazing technology it was and fall behind. That didn't happen, and instead, it was Linux (or, as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux) that had to change or face death. Copyleft has completely failed to change the software industry, and Linux is now full of commercial software that hums along happily without the GPL infecting them.

Besides which, such headers (along with APIs and other interface descriptions) weren't traditionally considered copyrightable until 2021, when Oracle got itself a favourable ruling in Oracle v Google by hitting retry on the courts until it got a compliant judge.

No, this is completely wrong, headers are code and can be copyrighted. The reason you can use gcc headers in your code is they're released under the LGPL, not the GPL. Here's the copyright on string.h:

/* Copyright (C) 1991-2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This file is part of the GNU C Library.

The GNU C Library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.

The GNU C Library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU
Lesser General Public License for more details.

You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
License along with the GNU C Library; if not, see
<https://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. */

/*
* ISO C99 Standard: 7.21 String handling <string.h>
*/

The reason you can do #include <string.h> is the gcc headers are released under the LGPL. You can't include GPL headers without the resulting code being considered a derived work and getting GPL'd as well.

 

[Lapsus of the bepsus]

Yes, that's the whole point.

no that is not the whole point, you implied that stallman is a vocal opponent of non-copyleft free licenses which would make him a hypocrite but so far youve shown nothing to back that up

 

[x3firehexx]

Why are you kicking the linux thread again, can't you see that it's already a complete wasteland

At least it's a contained wasteland. Is it a wasteland? Sure, but said wasteland has been deliberatly created, assigned and marked as such, and the waste is mostly contained with some spillover in the open source community thread.
(i say some because there's overlap between the linux thread and the open source community thread, i guess you could say because it's within, as in a subset?)