Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Swapping GNU coreutils for uutils coreutils on Gentoo Linux

joshmcguigan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 134 posts

Re: Swapping GNU coreutils for uutils coreutils on Gentoo Linux

#51

Post by IshKebab »

daghamm wrote: post #42

Aren't the Rust binaries significantly larger? Wouldn't that be a problem for embedded system and containers? I'm also sceptical to the whole idea. There are tons of more interesting problems to solve than replacing an stable solution with a new one just because you don't like GPL.

It uses a single binary like Busybox to solve that: https://uutils.github.io/coreutils/docs/multicall.html

I agree it's not what I would spend my time on, but I guess some people found this problem more interesting than us. I don't see a problem with that. Security vulnerabilities in GNU coreutils are rare but they happen. Also this would make building and editing the tools more accessible.

Re: Swapping GNU coreutils for uutils coreutils on Gentoo Linux

#52

Post by pjmlp »

DeathArrow wrote: post #38
pjmlp wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPL only took off, because Berkeley was rather busy with AT&T, and GNU was there for Linus to reach for. It isn't only Rust, it is any language that favours static linking by default.

I still wonder how an alternative world, where BSD won instead of Linux, would look like.

Most likely it would be business as usual for all UNIXes, taking what they would feel like from BSD, as they were doing before during the whole AT&T vs BSD base model for UNIX architecture, like how Solaris evolved, or Windows used for its initial TCP/IP infrastructure (until Vista).

Re: Swapping GNU coreutils for uutils coreutils on Gentoo Linux

#53

Post by eru »

NekkoDroid wrote: post #13
Athas wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and undoing this means it's no longer UNIX as it will no longer run on that PDP-11! (Unless you can afford a bigger disk I guess.)

If "being UNIX" hinges on the fucking filesystem structure I honestly am fine with it "not being UNIX"

I suspect you missed the sarcasm in Athas' comment?

Re: Swapping GNU coreutils for uutils coreutils on Gentoo Linux

#54

Post by happymellon »

DeathArrow wrote: post #38
pjmlp wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPL only took off, because Berkeley was rather busy with AT&T, and GNU was there for Linus to reach for. It isn't only Rust, it is any language that favours static linking by default.

I still wonder how an alternative world, where BSD won instead of Linux, would look like.

We already have a fairly good idea based upon corporate actions today.

Look at Mac OS. That's what happens when freedoms don't have to be honoured. Corporations have spent a lot of effort trying to work around the GPL, whether it was via network services or something else.

If everyone had gone down the BSD route we would have been there, just a lot quicker. This is why I would never licence any of my work as anything other than GPL or AGPL (dual so that people can pay to avoid GPL, but they still contribute financially).

This is all a team effort to make the world a better place and BSD is too idealistic.

Re: Swapping GNU coreutils for uutils coreutils on Gentoo Linux

#56

Post by eru »

colechristensen wrote: post #29
LightFog wrote: post #17

It’s a shame to see all this effort going toward replacing core GPL licensed utilities with permissive ones. It seems like a particularly common thing in the Rust community. It feels disrespectful of the intentions of the work that went into the tools that are being cloned.

GNU coreutils is to a very large extent nearly exactly copied functionality from other unix distributions (unix system v, BSDs). It's not like GNU is getting ripped off here. GNU coreutils is a clone, nobody's feelings should be hurt if somebody else makes another clone of the same functionality. (license zealots will have hurt feelings but for different reasons)

For better or worse, Gnu added lots of functionality. It's far from a 'nearly exact copy'.

Re: Swapping GNU coreutils for uutils coreutils on Gentoo Linux

#57

Post by nubinetwork »

M95D wrote: post #48

> Instead of modifying all the packages that depend on GNU coreutils (known as the package sys-apps/coreutils in Gentoo), I modified the GNU coreutils package to instead install uutils coreutils. That's not the way to do it (in Gentoo). He should have added coreutils to /etc/portage/profile/package.provided. Portage would then assume the package is installed even if it's not. This is used to install self-built binari…

I also cringed a little when I read that they used the same package name for their replacement, especially considering they were aware of virtuals and the alternatives frameworks... although I've never tried to do what they did, so maybe they had issues converting the entire portage tree to be compliant. I'll admit that it's a lot of work, but if you wanted to do it right, you'd have to put in that additional work.

Re: Swapping GNU coreutils for uutils coreutils on Gentoo Linux

#58

Post by eru »

IshKebab wrote: post #51
daghamm wrote: post #42

Aren't the Rust binaries significantly larger? Wouldn't that be a problem for embedded system and containers? I'm also sceptical to the whole idea. There are tons of more interesting problems to solve than replacing an stable solution with a new one just because you don't like GPL.

It uses a single binary like Busybox to solve that: https://uutils.github.io/coreutils/docs/multicall.html I agree it's not what I would spend my time on, but I guess some people found this problem more interesting than us. I don't see a problem with that. Security vulnerabilities in GNU coreutils are rare but they happen. Also this would make building and editing the tools more accessible.

I remember I had some idea for (GNU) grep, but I couldn't even build the damn thing. It's autotools hell.

Re: Swapping GNU coreutils for uutils coreutils on Gentoo Linux

#59

Post by vzaliva »

Unlike some other commenters, I believe having alternatives to coreutils is beneficial. Since I started using Unix, I've worked with HPUX, IRIX, SunOS, Solaris, *BSD, Linux, Xenix, and probably a few others I've forgotten. This diversity in implementations necessitated standardization. Nowadays, 90% of the systems I use are various Linux distributions, and I often encounter packages that implicitly assume on specific versions like GNU make or GNU tar. Having alternatives encourages better compatibility and flexibility across different systems.

Re: Swapping GNU coreutils for uutils coreutils on Gentoo Linux

#60

Post by bpbp-mango »

daghamm wrote: post #42

Aren't the Rust binaries significantly larger? Wouldn't that be a problem for embedded system and containers? I'm also sceptical to the whole idea. There are tons of more interesting problems to solve than replacing an stable solution with a new one just because you don't like GPL.

it started as a fun way for people to learn rust. it got rather more serious afterwards
Post reply on HN