• 0 Posts
  • 12 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle
  • No idea what you are talking about… did you get an assignment to implement some CLI program and want ideas for what to do?

    If this program was made in a language that supports creating packages for other programs (e.g. Python, Rust, NodeJS), should this program be a ‘package’, or should it be a standalone program that has a simple “setup” script?

    I’d assume what you call “packages for other programs” would be plugins? In that case, unless you have a specific existing program you want to write a plugin for, then yours would be a standalone program.

    About the “setup script”, if you mean that’s an installer of sorts, then no, your program must not necessarily have an installer (you or others may write standalone installers or packages for various package managers, but that’s another story).








  • talkingpumpkin@lemmy.worldtoLinux@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    It would seem my point is not getting through (ie. I must not have expressed it well enough).

    You having freedom doesn’t mean other people have a duty to support what you do - it just means they don’t have legal ground to stop you.

    For example, freedom of speech doesn’t mean that newspaper must publish whatever you write - it just means the police won’t come knocking on your door at 5am because you of something you wrote.

    The “idea of linux” (by which I take you mean the idea of FOSS in general, not of the kernel specifically) isn’t to support anything and everything.

    Does dropping 32 bit go against the “idea of linux”? Does software being developed/tested only on specific distros go against it? Do devs that only supporting glibc because they don’t care about musl go against the idea of linux?

    I’m just expressing a concern where over relying on one init system will limit options

    Nope, nothing actually limits the options of people who don’t like systemd: if they want to run some FOSS piece of software whose upstream devs don’t care about openrc (or whatever init of choice), they’ll just have to fork the projects, put the work in, and the upstream devs won’t be able to stop them in any way.

    This is what the “freedom” in FOSS means. Twisting it to mean that upstream goes against “the idea of linux” if they don’t support whatever thing you care about and they don’t is entitled.


  • talkingpumpkin@lemmy.worldtoLinux@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    this doesn’t go with the idea of Linux, which is having “freedom” with your os

    Err… it’s “freedom” as in “you are free to run your own system using whatever software you wish” not “freedom” as in “distros and devs have a duty to support your freedom to run any specific software you happen to like”.

    Let’s turn down the entitlement dial a bit.


  • TLDR:

    Current status for 26.04 LTS

    We shipped rust-coreutils as the default in Ubuntu 25.10 to maximise real-world testing ahead of the LTS. Based on the audit findings and remediation progress, here is where we stand for Ubuntu 26.04 LTS.

    We have included the latest upstream release 0.8.0 in Ubuntu 26.04, which incorporates the bulk of the security fixes.

    cp, mv, and rm continue to be provided by GNU coreutils in 26.04. These utilities have remaining open TOCTOU (time-of-check to time-of-use) issues (8 as of Apr 22, 2026) that need to be resolved before we are confident shipping them.

    Our plan is to address the remaining issues as soon as possible and target Ubuntu 26.10 with 100% rust-coreutils.


  • Still, some neckbeards only wanna use software from orgs who are in it “for the love of the game”.

    Nope, that’s just you fighting strawmen and labelling people who don’t hold your same opinion “neckbeards”.

    I would be excited for a new FOSS browser regardless of specific features, and I could be excited for a non-FOSS one if it had particularly promising features that are not provided by any FOSS browser. As far as I can see, Orion does not fall in either category.

    BTW marketing a product for its privacy (or security) without it being open source amounts to having “trust me bro” as a slogan… of course one is free to trust whoever they want to.