this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024
358 points (98.6% liked)

Linux

56609 readers
639 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] melroy@kbin.melroy.org 18 points 2 years ago (3 children)
[–] unreachable@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Doesn't compile where musl does.

[–] Rustmilian@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

While there may be challenges and specific configurations required, you absolutely can compile Rust on and targeting to a musl-based system.

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I meant, Rust suppports vewer architectures.

[–] Rustmilian@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Rust actually supports most architectures(SPARC, AMD64/x86-64, ARM, PowerPC, RISC-V, and AMDGPU*). The limitations are from LLVM not supporting some architects(Alpha, SuperH, and VAX) and some instruction sets(sse2, etc.); z/Architecture is a bit of an outlier that has major challenges to overcome for LLVM-Rust. This is not going to be a problem when GCC-Rust is finished.

AMDGPU, *Not 100%, but works well enough to actually use in production and gets better all the time.

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Rustmilian@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Np. It's a common point of confusion.
You can use rustup target list to see all available architectures and targets.

[–] mariusafa@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah Musl is pretty good to learn C libs but the main red flag is the MIT Licence

[–] sxan@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Why? MIT is more liberal than GPL. Why is it a red flag?

[–] mariusafa@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I get is more liberal which I understand why. But that means that changes to the software do not need to be shared. Which for normal users it really does not matter. But again we are giving to multi corporations so much in exchange of nothing. When again they don't treat their users the same way.

MIT is a good licence as an idea. In reality, multi corporations are evil AF. The idea of free software in a sense is that free software can get so much better than privative one, eventually forcing privative companies to implement it them self on their programs.

If giving and taking was 1:1 in software community then again, MIT license is perfect. In reality it isn't. For major programs that have a lot of implication on new programs I do not recommend MIT and similar. For feature like projects is totally okay IMO.

[–] sxan@midwest.social 4 points 1 year ago

I respect your opinion on this, and will say only one more thing: having worked in the corporate software space for decades, you don't want their software. Most of it is utter crap. It's a consequence of finance having too much indirect influence, high turnover, a lot of really uninspired and mediocre developers, and a lack of the fundamentally evolutionary pressures that exist in OSS. The only thing corporations do better is marketting.