Ignoring the anti-GPL nature of Rust rewrites
Is there something wrong with Rust that I missed?
this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2026
13 points (100.0% liked)
technology
24301 readers
198 users here now
On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.
Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020
- Ways to run Microsoft/Adobe and more on Linux
- The Ultimate FOSS Guide For Android
- Great libre software on Windows
- Hey you, the lib still using Chrome. Read this post!
Rules:
- 1. Obviously abide by the sitewide code of conduct. Bigotry will be met with an immediate ban
- 2. This community is about technology. Offtopic is permitted as long as it is kept in the comment sections
- 3. Although this is not /c/libre, FOSS related posting is tolerated, and even welcome in the case of effort posts
- 4. We believe technology should be liberating. As such, avoid promoting proprietary and/or bourgeois technology
- 5. Explanatory posts to correct the potential mistakes a comrade made in a post of their own are allowed, as long as they remain respectful
- 6. No crypto (Bitcoin, NFT, etc.) speculation, unless it is purely informative and not too cringe
- 7. Absolutely no tech bro shit. If you have a good opinion of Silicon Valley billionaires please manifest yourself so we can ban you.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
This rewrite of coreutils is licensed under some non-copyleft license, whereas the GNU coreutils are obviously under GPL. Currently there are other Rust rewrite projects of various tools and libraries, and they all seem to be like that. There have long been folks who would rather get rid of GPL code, and various corporations are encouraging this. If at some point they succeed, they could make a fully proprietary userland and cause a very real setback to free software and user freedom.
rust itself is quite good, licensing is a separate matter. its pretty trivial to make very snappy and efficient programs in rust due to how memory is handled. its generally also more secure, because again, the memory management is superb.
i love devving on rust its great. some orgs are ran by idiots that dont know much about licensing and dont do copyleft unfortunately
not rust itself, could be written in C with the wrong license
25.10 has been the buggiest version of Ubuntu in a while for me. I really gotta hop distros.
im a ubuntu 24 LTS boy for my servarr/jellyfin box and have no complaints. my most reliable system, by far.
Same on my homelab, actually. I have no complaints there, its just my desktop thats been a mess. Some of it is, of course, being on a non-LTS version, but there are things that are broken now that were perfectly fine before 25.10.
If you're okay with occasionally having to mess with stuff, come on over to arch. I recommend CachyOS for a well put-together distro.
I appreciate the suggestion, but I have a desktop, laptop, and homelab all running Ubuntu atm so I think I would like to stay in the debian ecosystem for now. And while I know its not necessarily distro specific, I do like gnome a fair bit.
You'll be fine on vanilla Debian for basically all these things. If you need newer drivers or a newer version of some program, you can check the Debian backports repo; they recompile stuff from testing for stable. Includes newer kernels and bunch of other stuff. It will only install (and update) stuff you manually install from backports, the rest of the system stays on stable.
If that doesn't cut it, you can always run testing itself. Since packages migrate from unstable to testing (after like two weeks or so) only if they do not have serious bugs and all their dependencies are already met, testing is (basically) never in a broken state. If you put the codename, instead of "testing" in the sources.list, it'll just turn into stable when that's released. The backports are pretty safe also when upgrading, since they're never newer than testing or the next stable.
you might like vanillaos or bazzite. vanillaos is an immutable distro like bazzite but based on debian. makes maintenance easier. i personally prefer bootc compatible distros because it makes distrohopping easier, but immutable distros in general are good for helping users abandon ship if a project becomes problematic.
I'll check it out, thanks!