I disagree. While I totally understand that it is an optional feature that can enabled and enforced only by others, I am not happy that the developers of systemd rushed to include it into the JSON file with the user info. I would expect the developers to be a bit more resistant to requests by two US states and Brazil. Why are they making it so easy? I guess we will see a resurgence of systemd-free dirstros.

This is a very valid reason, indeed.

A lot of things can go wrong. A company can take the free code, change it slightly to work only with a proprietary file type and then use their resources to promote their version and make their proprietary filetype and proprietary program the industry standard. Unfortunately this sounds too familiar. There are even cases that the filetype is an open standard but obfuscated to make it impossible for anyone (including the original FOSS) to open/save it.

I’m pretty sure that code written in any language can be licensed under the GPL. That’s why I cannot understand the backlash against Rush for the Kernel.

GPL enforces that all derivatives are FOSS and GPL as well. With permissive licenses, like MIT and Apache, a company is free to take the code, change/develop it further (or leave it as is) and make it closed-sourced without sharing anything with anyone. Regarding Rust, I am with you. Hence my question.

Can someone explain to me why Rust has been so controversial for the GNU/Linux kernel? One thing that I personally don’t like is that the equivalent Rust-made (equivalent) GNU tools are licensed under MIT (or Apache? - something permissive like that) instead of GPL. If they were under GPL, I’d be more than happy. But since the kernel is under GPL regardless of C or Rust, what is the reason for the backlash? Sounds like a very promising language indeed.

There was a time that Ubuntu was more polished than other distros but these times are gone. Canonical tried to capitalize their success by making their users “the product” at first and now have attempted to release a closed ecosystem of snaps based on proprietary backend software. They have signed their own death sentence more than once. Their way to redemption is to release the source code of the snap store under GPL and stop trying to replace GPLed tools with MIT or Apache licenses. Either you are committed to free software or not.

I am not sure how to answer that. Are you asking me to give you an example that the GNU coreutils were not used in a closed sourced s/w?

I think that people are negative towards rust utils, not because of rust or attachment to an old software but because they are not licensed under GPL or another copyleft license. Even if they become faster and more stable in the future, this is a flaw that will not be ignored.

This! If it is Free Software, it respects everyone’s freedom. If I don’t like the developer, I will not buy them a coffee. If I don’t like the software practices of the developer, a fork is in order (e.g. Oracle with OpenOffice --> LibreOffice)

One thing that I love about Cosmic is that it is made in Rust and is licensed under GPL. This is contrast to the replacement of the coreutils with new, Rust made, which are unfortunately licensed under MIT. Ubuntu rushed to adopt them. One more case of foul play by them after making the server side of snap proprietary.

I am with you 100% on the reddit aspect but have to acknowledge that any person can make their own choices. Eventually, a platform with much longer history will continue being successful, if only due to inertia alone. However, one more big mistake from reddit may be enough for the FOSS subs to migrate to this platform. As for the Linux kernel, are you sure it is hosted on github? Or is it only a backup?

And that’s how WW3 started…!

While all areas could benefit in terms of stability and ease of development from standadization, the whole system and each area would suffer in terms of creativity. There needs to be a balance. However, if I had to choose one thing, I’d say the package management. At the moment we have deb, rpm, pacman, flatpak, snap (the latter probably should not be considered as the server side is proprietary) and more from some niche distros. This makes is very difficult for small developers to offer their work to all/most users. Otherwise, I think it is a blessing having so many DEs, APIs, etc.

I have a similar T14 with AMD and everything works fine, except the fingerprint reader. Tested with Debian, Fedora, MX, and more

It should work without any issues. AMD is perfectly fine. They are among the main contributors to the Linux kernel and their products work just fine. In general, you should be worried only about nVidia cards, which this laptop doesn’t have. Even these are working much better nowadays.

Congrats! Thank you very much for your incredible work

Fedora Core (the first one) was my first love in Linux. I tried SuSE before that but wasn’t as polished as it is now. That was more than 20 years ago!

MX Linux. It is Debian with setup and tools I really want but would be too lazy to prepare in one go. Love it as much as I love Debian.

My first distro was Suse Linux 8.1. I had to buy the box as downloading was not an option with my dial-up connection back then. However, the first distro that I fell in love with was Fedora Core. The original one. I bought the book which had the DVD with the full installation. I was hooked. That was more than 20 years ago.