The hits keep coming from Ubuntu. Yesterday they announced the sabotage of grub. Today they're shoehorning in a rust ntp rewrite. chronyd is written in C with a GPL license. The rust rewrite has a CoC and is MIT. Why do they hate GPL so much?
>>108460124IMO once everything is MIT they can "update" the license in something more compatible with a fedora/redhat dichotomy except they'll have the community version (which would probably be very unstable and barebone) open with a very restrictive licensing and the enterprise version exclusively closed (which would probably be very stable and shipping extra proprietary goodies). The viral nature of the GPL doesn't work like that well enough and wouldn't allow changes in licensing.tl;dr Stallman was right but corposhit finally found a way around that pesky GPL
>>108460124>>108460362>/g/eets: oh muh gnu rust bad redhat ubuntu ibm conspiracy>reality: the og openntpd/ntpsec was never gnu-licensed and chrony was created by red hatlol
>>108460124MIT is more permissive than GPL so there’s nothing stopping anyone from maintaining a GPL licensed fork and using that instead.
>>108460422Nigger rewriting for whatever (overinflated) technical reason and migrating licenses for a different model aren't mutually exclusive, you could have read my post at face value without sparging about muh conspiracy, which btw in the year of the lord 2026 has lost any weight as a derogatory, jhc find better material.
>The "hits" keep coming>Yesterday they announced the "sabotage" of grub>Today they're "shoehorning in" a rust ntp "rewrite"---->if you took my very factual post at face value, you would have realized that i didn't partake in any conspiratorial talk OKAY...although there is totally a conspiracy because muh current yearlol
>>108460124Why is it always the same guy?What's his role?
>>108460922>failed reading comprehensionthis thread is about the licensing changes
>>108460441If it's more permissive, how can you restrict the rights it grants ?
>>108460942>>108460951Right. It lacks the protections of the GPL. So, some guy took taxpayer funding to write this rust project and MIT licensed it. And now Canonical is funding his MIT licensed work. They're abandoning the GPL roots of GNU. MIT licensing allows shenanigans.
>>108460362GPL is a failure. What should have happened is smaller companies should have been able to adopt open standards with permissive licenses to compete. inb4> Why would I want IBM to use MY BOOT LOADERBecause then we know how the bootloader works. Reverse engineering and hacking becomes easy if corporations use the same baseline technology. They aren't going to rewrite their own version from scratch (if they haven't already) because that's a cost center and investors wouldn't tolerate it.This current decision from Ubuntu is more to do with the usual DEI and trans activists
>>108460962>some guy took taxpayer fundingsource
>>108460969>the usual DEI and trans activistscan you point to the DIE and trans activists involved with ntpd-rs
>>108460973https://www.sovereign.tech/about
Do they even have the right to relicense GPL code even if it's a rewrite in another language ? Similar case as the retard who vibe coded a rewrite of some GPL tool and relicensed it from GPL to MIT I think, and the original author posted on their Github to say that you can't relicense a rewrite because you've been exposed to the original code.
>>108460951You can fork the codebase and make that fork GPL. There's nothing stopping you from doing this. Actually, this is one of the reasons why companies are reluctant to release software with GPL and LGPL. The risk that you get "locked out" of your code base and a better FOSS version exists is a nonstarter in the business world. But then /g/ is unemployed and the average GPL fan is a literal commie
>>108460987>Rusties didn't know about clean-room implementationsColor me surprised. I just hope they get sued into literally suicide ...... I mean, even more than usual.
>>108460984It's a rust project. Dig a little deeper. I can't spoonfeed you.>>108460987This is legally dubious. Emulation and reverse engineering are protected. An intentional rewrite would be a violation. But simply "being exposed to a GPL version" hasn't been supported in courts.
>>108460989>locked outWhat do you mean locked out ? They can still develop their inferior version, why would they care ?
>>108461008> t. unemployed If this isn't glaringly obvious by now, this defense of GPL is insanely retarded.
>>108460362>everything is MIT they can "update" the license in something more compatible with a fedora/redhat dichotomybut the historical MIT versions of the code will still be under an MIT license right ? you can't take that back ? and those MIT versions can be forked
>>108461016I'm not a lawyer and to companies code are tools, not a popularity competition.
Most (all?) of these rust rewrites are bundled with a CoC and choose MIT over GPL. Ubuntu is quickly adopting MIT projects to replace the original GPL versions.
>>108460124does anyone actually use ubuntu?
>>108461038I think it gets more use in the corporate world where it's seen as Debian+available support contracts and some nice-to-have features. Once a company makes a decision to roll out a specific distro it's hard to make changes. Employees learn how to work with that distro and reloading all the servers is very difficult.Linux users have been spoiled by the gifts of GPL and the original GNU software.
>>108461027No, it's a cost center. If I'm Motorola and I have firmware that I can release without other license implications it's a huge win to do so. My product is different enough from my competitors that I don't have to worry about them copying the software (I sell hardware). And if I release the firmware I get tons of free publicity, good will from consumers, community involvement in my products, and basically free support if someone has an issue the firmware can be patched by anyone who knows how.But if I'm locked out of that code base I'm unable to incorporate it back into my mainline project without risking license infringement on other projects or dependencies. I might have different versions of the same product floating around with different features because now there's a dozen different forks with copyleft licenses that I don't control. How _the_fuck_ am I supposed to support my customers if I have no idea what version of the product their running? Tell me that you've never worked with hardware, without telling me that you've worked with hardware.
>>108461071What the fuck do you mean by locked out ?If you release it under the GPL the forks have to be GPL too, so you can incorporate their changed back into you codebase.
>>108461071Also companies NEVER support third party software. It doesn't matter if they provide GPL firmware or closed source, anyone can write their own retro-engineered firmware and they will not ever support it. Why would they feel the need to support a fork of their own firmware ?
>>108460124Cool. Is the ntpd-rs split into crates? I made a fork of busybox's ntp server so I could make a fake one for testing. I'd imagine a rust library would be easier to use.
>>108461135I don't know rust packaging well. It seems to have a lot of dependencies:https://github.com/pendulum-project/ntpd-rs/blob/main/Cargo.lock
>>108461082If you aren't following along you're just retarded. Nobody has opened up large amounts of their proprietary software to GPL. It hasn't happened yet and it isn't going to happen. "Proprietary software" isn't a monolith either. Very commonly proprietary codebases have other dependencies and 3rd parties who touched it. Nobody cares what some fat smelly commie in his mother's basement thinks. This is why you're a fat smelly commie sitting alone in your mother's basement. >>108461105The issue here is that hardware companies make money by selling hardware. Software isn't the product, its the thing that makes the hardware run. The fact that they're bundled together is usually an accident unless certain features are deliberately disabled at the firmware level. This can happen for business reasons and technical reasons. Customers need support for that product sometimes. I've hard more than enough exposure from both sides of the equation to know that customers doing retarded things with the product is a massive support and liability issue. I can smell the unemployment on so many of these posters because they've obviously never seen the other side of the equation.
>>108460986are you german?
>>108460987ntpd-rs is not a "rewrite" of a gpl project, let alone a project that "copied" gpl code. you're taking the word of tech illiterate literal retards at face value.
>>108461164I don't pretend to work with hardware but you keep repeating in every post that you know everything on the subject yet make barely any sense.
>>108460987What case are you talking about anon? Sauce please
>>108461001>i just made it up. but feel free to sink time in an attempt to find evidence that collaborates my hallucinations
>>108461135>>108461146https://github.com/pendulum-project/ntpd-rs/tree/main/ntp-protothe workspace is split into (only) two crates, with ntpd proper depending on this ntp-proto.
>>108461210Found it.Here:https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327#issue-4024256439
>>108461164>Software isn't the product, its the thing that makes the hardware run.Yeah, that would explain the sheer incompetency on display. Like, if I had churned out code like this I'd get fired.
>>108461206Then why are you proclaiming that everyone should move to GPL? I get that most people don't have experience with hardware. But then why do so many people think they know how to effectively run a business that primarily sells hardware? Compare Linux with SQLite. Linux is a high quality FOSS project licensed with GPL and installed on billions of devices. SQLite is the same, but it's public domain. In theory Linux should be more restrictive to corpos because of the license. But in practice companies have found numerous loopholes to skirt the spirit of the license while following the letter. SQLite is a ubiquitous standard because it is public domain. There are other embedded databases out there. But SQLite reigns supreme because of the licensing. The company behind SQLite is privately owned so we don't have quarterly reports, but they state that they are financially stable through 2050 - that's not a typo. They have enough money to survive as they currently exist for the next 25 years. Other examples exist of course, you could look at the BSDs which are installed on many different devices as well. The foundations are financially stable and have thriving communities. The issue isn't legalese. It's control. By giving up control at the front end of the deal permissive licenses "infect" corporations far more than GPL ever could. But hey, if I'm wrong why don't you try to fork one of the projects with a permissive license and see how many people use your fork
>>108461267Then fix it. Stop bitching about it and fix it. But if it is a GPL "fix" then don't complain about the company ignoring it instead of fixing their product.
>>108461272>Then why are you proclaiming that everyone should move to GPLYou're having hallucinations. Seek help shizoman because you're hearing voices.
>>108461292>Then fix it.Yeah, because doing other people's job is my job, right? Wrong.And as such I will talk all the smack in the world, and there is not a thing you can do about it.
>>108461241Yeah AI implementation seems to be the issue here. I doubt that it will hold up in court if it goes that far. AI is very much a grey area. It's possible this will be relicensed since it seems reasonable the publisher should know about where his own code came from (doubtful if AI generated). But the claim that "being exposed" to a LGPL work makes all subsequent work done by that author subject to LGPL isn't something that would hold up in court. The claim that this is derivative needs to be proven, not assumed. Also, you can't "own" the rights to somethings like ideas. Neither copyrights nor patents allow this in the United States.
>>108461300You're openly proclaiming that companies have no reason not to use GPL. In fact, there's ample reason not to.>>108461303Yeah, commies never do work. This is why it fails.
>>108461350>commies never do workOh, like you? Because my proof of work is apparent: >>108461267
>>108461350>In fact, there's ample reason not to.You couldn't demonstrate it.
>>108461346As some guy in the comments pointed out, AI is derivative by nature
>>108461038are you retarded?hint: both the questions have the same answer
>>108461367Sure buddy. We'll give you an attendance trophy komrad. You're definitely "working">>108461368Your failure to understand how the business world operates in no way reflects on me.>>108461377"As some guy pointed out" isn't a strong legal argument. It probably will end up going that way. But lawyers don't work like that. It's really odd to me how so many software people think of the legal system. Also odd that so many don't understand that corporate lawyers are like hackers, they're looking for ways to find a bug and take you to court over it. GPL failing to protect Linux is just one example
>>108461401>You're definitely "working"Compared to you and the slop you're responsible for? Yes. Without a doubt, even.
Linux is worse than Windows at this point kek
>>108461415And I get called a schizo. This is your brain on communism
>>108461423>isn't called "incompetent schizo"Says a lot about the people you hang out with.
>>108461427Your replies only look more schizo.
>>108461452>isn't worried about the "incompetent" partAnd that says a lot about (You).
>>108461368Anon has a perfectly good point that with GPL each contribution effectively carries it's own license. Most of the time this doesn't matter. But if the owner wants to change the license you need permission from each contributor to do so. This isn't an issue with permissive licenses like MIT because they allow this kind of openness to begin with. If you're such a newfag that you don't know about the instances where this has happened, maybe you should read discussions about licensing instead of sharing your "opinion"
>>108461461Anon at this point you're so off topic and so blinded by retarded ideology that you've inserted me into your debugging fantasies. If that isn't living rent free in your mind raped brain nothing is.Imagine being this mind raped that some people contribute their time for free without worrying if someone else makes a buck off of it.
>>108461481>implying I would read that many words from an incompetent schizoYou had your chance. You didn't use it. From now on you and your opinions are less worth than dirt.
