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

submitted 2 months ago by cm0002@lemdro.id to c/linux@programming.dev

15 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 22 points 2 months ago

Providing fodder for the "ermagerd, rust is evil" crowd, even though it has nothing to do with rust.

[-] somegeek@programming.dev 15 points 2 months ago

No it's just a news about the pointless, corporate rust rewrite of GNU coreutils being a shitshow.

[-] TehPers@beehaw.org 10 points 2 months ago

uutils is rewritten by a corporation? Huh, TIL. I guess their website is wrong:

uutils is a community-driven, open-source effort maintained by volunteers around the world. There is no company behind it, just contributors who care about the future of foundational command-line tools.

[-] somegeek@programming.dev 5 points 2 months ago

Claims are easy. Actions are what matters. rewriting FOSS program with GPL license under MIT license is only possible from either a corporate backed project (because it makes takeover of a lot of FOSS infra so much simpler for them), or an extremely stupid team. both cases are equally bad.

[-] TehPers@beehaw.org 5 points 2 months ago

Got it. Andrew Gallant is extremely stupid. Will keep that in mind.

[-] somegeek@programming.dev -1 points 2 months ago

Thanks! So probably, we can conclude that he's getting paid corporate money. Good for him, just a shame if others use it.

Btw, a very smart person can still make very stupid decisions.

[-] lengau@midwest.social 3 points 2 months ago

Oh then it must be because of the MIT license!

[-] Papierkorb@feddit.org 9 points 2 months ago

That's my biggest pet peeve with it honestly. My theory is still that it's a mistake that modern languages/tooling create a LICENSE file for you. In the before-times, when someone posted a project without then you told them and they educated themselves. Some chose GPL, some MIT, all fine, as long you do it with an educated mind. But now, the file gets created, technically legally binding contract of sorts, and the authors simply never bothered to check.

Change my mind: Linux is only still highly relevant because of GPL, not despite of.

[-] eutampieri@feddit.it 3 points 2 months ago

Cargo doesn’t create a LICENCE for you, and it doesn’t set the metadata like npm. It even tells you to go choose a license when you try to publish a crate without one

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 2 months ago

The term "cuck license" for MIT and similar licenses is a good one IMO.

[-] ZombieCyborgFromOuterSpace@piefed.ca 1 points 2 months ago

I agree with you on that one.

this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2026

31 points (89.7% liked)

Linux

14976 readers

316 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

Ategon@programming.dev

anzo@programming.dev

dwraf_of_ignorance@programming.dev