13 votes

Debian running on Rust coreutils

10 comments

  1. [10]
    lionirdeadman
    Link
    I think this is really cool. Although not because it's rust but simply because I think GNU is an outdated organization and that rewriting software tends to result in better code generally....

    I think this is really cool.

    Although not because it's rust but simply because I think GNU is an outdated organization and that rewriting software tends to result in better code generally. However, I do wish this was using a copyleft license rather than a permissive one.

    It'll be interesting to see if any distro tries to ship it by default.

    7 votes
    1. [9]
      helloworld
      Link Parent
      To be fair to GNU, (as someone born way after GNU coreutile began), they had to support every OS under the sun since they didn't have their own ATM, and chose to trade size/complexity for speed.

      To be fair to GNU, (as someone born way after GNU coreutile began), they had to support every OS under the sun since they didn't have their own ATM, and chose to trade size/complexity for speed.

      8 votes
      1. [3]
        bloup
        Link Parent
        I wish I could find a link to back this up, but it was so long ago. I remember reading somewhere (might have been GNU mailing lists or somewhere on gnu.org) that talked about the (at least early)...

        I wish I could find a link to back this up, but it was so long ago. I remember reading somewhere (might have been GNU mailing lists or somewhere on gnu.org) that talked about the (at least early) "design philosophy" of the project, basically telling you "how to make a GNU program". What I think was interesting, is that what I read seemed to indicate that a lot of what is today perceived as "bloat" was really originally a strategy to help protect GNU from copyright claims against them by AT&T. Essentially, it's harder for AT&T to make a copyright claim stick when the GNU version does more stuff. Another thing they advised is if a particular program the individual is reimplementing was specifically optimized for some kind of outcome (like, maybe the AT&T version is made to be really fast or made to be really small), choose a different target and optimize for that instead, solely because that will produce a program that is substantially different in form and function.

        I wonder if any of this sounds familiar to anyone else, maybe they know where I can find a link.

        11 votes
        1. [2]
          helloworld
          Link Parent
          Sounds very plausible. I remember GCC was developed in a tightly coupled monolithic fashion just so proprietary front ends could not be developed for it, ironically forcing it on back foot when...

          Sounds very plausible. I remember GCC was developed in a tightly coupled monolithic fashion just so proprietary front ends could not be developed for it, ironically forcing it on back foot when LLVM emerged.

          Ultimately what made GNU tools "win" IMO/ime is that they just worked and worked well, while everything else had some quirk or another, which is why I wonder if original fear was worth it.

          6 votes
          1. bloup
            Link Parent
            I’d say the choice wound up just moving the problem space. What’s the functional difference between a proprietary front end for LLVM and, say, using gcc to compile the proprietary Oracle JVM?

            I’d say the choice wound up just moving the problem space. What’s the functional difference between a proprietary front end for LLVM and, say, using gcc to compile the proprietary Oracle JVM?

            4 votes
      2. [5]
        lionirdeadman
        Link Parent
        I'm not so worried about speed as much as security and I generally dislike GNU for its handling of projects. Example gnutls I've heard of some pretty toxic environment inside the FSF and would not...

        I'm not so worried about speed as much as security and I generally dislike GNU for its handling of projects. Example gnutls

        I've heard of some pretty toxic environment inside the FSF and would not be surprised if it also was the case in GNU considering RMS founded both.

        I just kinda hope GNU will eventually disappear because I don't think reforming it is worth the time. It's a shame because they contributed a lot early on.

        4 votes
        1. [4]
          teaearlgraycold
          Link Parent
          Knowing what I do about Stallman, I also expect GNU to have a toxic culture.

          Knowing what I do about Stallman, I also expect GNU to have a toxic culture.

          3 votes
          1. [3]
            hungariantoast
            Link Parent
            @lionirdeadman, some of the stuff posted by the FSF can be confrontational or overboard, almost like they're the PETA of free software (not quite though), but I've never actually read of members...

            @lionirdeadman, some of the stuff posted by the FSF can be confrontational or overboard, almost like they're the PETA of free software (not quite though), but I've never actually read of members of the FSF (aside from Stallman, who is a former member) being toxic themselves. If you have them on hand, I wouldn't mind reading testimonies or examples. I might be doing a project on Stallman for school, so I'm very interested in the larger culture of the FSF and GNU.

            I also do not recall encountering any sort of testimony or controversy about toxicity surrounding the GNU Project, except perhaps relating to at times over-zealous adherance to the ideas of copyleft or free software. Stallman is... complicated. I actually don't think he's a bad person. I think he has some unfortunate qualities that made (make) him a bad leader for free-software related organizations, but I don't think he's an overall bad person. Toxic? Yeeeeeeah, but not in a hateful or evil way. More like a "foot-in-mouth" kind of toxic. I'd rather hang out with Stallman than half the white dudes on Hacker News.

            I don't know where I'm going with this. Don't let the spectre of Stallman overshadow the crowd of good folks who participate in the GNU Project or the FSF, and definitely don't let it affect your impression of free software in general, which is so much bigger than any one person.

            7 votes
            1. alex11
              Link Parent
              lol. Not everyone is a fan of HN (for good reason)

              I'd rather hang out with Stallman than half the white dudes on Hacker News.

              lol. Not everyone is a fan of HN (for good reason)

              1 vote
            2. lionirdeadman
              Link Parent
              I believe that the FSF and GNU's goals regarding free software are good however, I do believe their connection to Stallman has many them a bad place. I do not believe that Stallman is only a bad...

              I believe that the FSF and GNU's goals regarding free software are good however, I do believe their connection to Stallman has many them a bad place. I do not believe that Stallman is only a bad leader who eats his toe nails. I believe that Stallman has pushed many people away from Free Software with his actions along decades.

              Here are more examples.

              I would like to highlight my previous example about GNU v. gnutls :

              Nikos, when you volunteered to maintain GNUTLS, the GNU Project entrusted its development to you. Your contributions so far are appreciated. However, the project GNUTLS does not belong to you.
              If you want to stop doing this job, you can. If you want to develop a fork of GNUTLS under another name, you can, since it is free software.
              But you cannot take GNUTLS out of the GNU Project. You cannot designate a non-GNU program as a replacement for a GNU package. We will continue the development of GNUTLS.

              Warning : Mentions of rape and child pornography made by Richard Stallman It's also unavoidable to mention Stallman's history regarding child pornography. Things such as banning child pornography is "censorship" and that "everyone age 14 or above ought to take part in sex, though not indiscriminately" and that "It might be an image of a sexually mature teenager that any normal adult would find attractive. What's heinous about having such a photo?" which is highlighted in [this ars technica article](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/09/richard-stallman-leaves-mit-after-controversial-remarks-on-rape/). These statements were not rectified until in 2019 during the Epstein incident. I do not believe that Stallman retracted those statements out of anything but fear.

              As for not letting Stallman overshadow other people, I believe that anyone who is willing to work with Stallman after knowing all this are unlikely to be very different from him. This might be seen as an example of bad people working with bad people (https://write.as/malinagalina/i-took-fsfe-to-court)

              However, while looking this up, I have found this post made by GNU maintainers asking for Stallman to resign from GNU but that has yet to happen.

              1 vote