Rust Coreutils cp Ended Up Breaking Ubuntu Image Builds With Latest Incompatibility
2026-07-04 11:01 UTC
Replies (9)
-
@mesamunefire@piefed.social 2026-07-04 11:54
Im so happy work stopped using ubuntu server after last time. Also how the heck do you break cp of all things.
-
@mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2026-07-04 12:13
When i’m in the most unnecessary competition and my opponent is rust coreutils:
-
@thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2026-07-04 13:53
People will blame Rust for the incompetence of Ubuntu team to adopt the uutils as default prematurely.
-
@zstg@programming.dev 2026-07-04 13:46
The project hasn’t had a stable release, and yes, it does certainly need more testing to uncover edge cases. Yes, MIT bad, but one must not diss on the project just because it has been written in Rust.
-
@somegeek@programming.dev 2026-07-04 18:53
The real shitshow is it’s MIT licensing. Corporate takeover 101
-
@cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 2026-07-04 14:25
What an absolute shitshow I’d say the month of June is actually a good time to be breaking and fixing things in a release that is due to come out in (checks notes) October.
-
@BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 2026-07-05 10:41
That cp went really hard apparently!
-
@CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml 2026-07-05 00:06
I love rust, but I absolutely hate how it’s used to jam MIT licenses where GPL belongs. Maybe it’s time we consider using corpos tools against them, and use an AI to rewrite GNU utils to Rust, so that people can continue contributing to Rust while not feeding corps? Edit: Though licensing AI software is iffy at best, you’ve got to own the copyright to something to licence it: Non-human productions are legally non-copyrightable. Also it might be better to just have humans do it anyway. The intent of my message was just that maybe we ought to deprive MIT-licensed projects from FOSS-motivated developers by providing Rust GPL alternatives to MIT/corporate Rust projects
-
@pixeldaemon@sh.itjust.works 2026-07-05 02:39
Rust-rewriting is a kind of madness. I like Rust, it’s an amazing language. But why rewrite programs that existed for decades and have proven their stability and safety? Rewriting them to Rust won’t make them safer, it will just introduce the kind of issues original versions have got fixed long ago. The MIT license also is a concern. I understand that many projects use it, and we can’t just reject them because of the license. But here we don’t see an innovation under MIT license - we see a copy of existing GNU tools, with hilarious issues and a corporation-friendly license. The fact uutils are being shipped despite being so raw shows that this is not about better software. The whole project is about abolishing GPL. And Rust is just an excuse. And the quality level of uutils being already shipped tells they either make free alpha testers for the corpos of the users, or there were no competent programmers to take part in the development. C will remain the core of the modern digital world for many years. It is impossible to rewrite everything to Rust in a couple of years. It needs a careful professional approach if we really want this to make software better. But in this case, no one does.