Redox - Your Next(Gen) OS - Redox - Your Next(Gen) OS
www.redox-os.org
The Redox official website

This isn’t Linux, but Linux-like. Its a microkernel built from the rust programming language. Its still experimental, but I think it has great potential. It has a GUI desktop, but the compiler isn’t quite fully working yet.

Has anyone used this before? What was your experience with it?

Note: If this is inappropriate since this isn’t technically Linux, mods please take down.

  • fossphi@lemm.eeEnglish
    331·
    11 months ago

    Yes, as much as I appreciate memory safety and rust in particular. I’m very worried by this pivot away from copyleft and GPL. Specially the rewriting in rust phenomenon of fundamental stuff. It’s safer, yes, but they’re all pretty much non GPL and it seems very risky to me. Make no mistake, the industry is riding this wave to move away from copyleft to permissive licenses.

    I wish that people understood the importance of FSF and GNU

    • agent_flounder@lemmy.worldEnglish
      93·
      11 months ago

      Well that is rather insidious. Crap. They probably understand the reasons for the GPL very well. Doesn’t mean they support them.

      • fossphi@lemm.eeEnglish
        7·
        11 months ago

        I’m sure there’s some community pull as well, because most of the rust ecosystem seems to be converged on MIT. But what despairs me is the wilful sidelining of GPL and everything GNU by some open source community members/corporate people. So yeah, you’re probably right

    • jack@monero.town
      314·
      11 months ago

      You make it sound like a conspiracy. Just accept that some things are organically more popular, like MIT which is very easy to understand and use for normies. It’s not perfect, but that’s how it is

      • Danny M@lemmy.escapebigtech.info
        214·
        11 months ago

        MIT is a terrible license that only got popular because of the popularity of the anti-open source movement in the last decade.

        one could write books about what’s wrong with the MIT license.

        It could even theoretically be argued that MIT has in some ways allowed big tech companies to proliferate, by effectively allowing them to take open-source code, modify it, and then close it off in their proprietary software. What does this mean? It means that the work of countless dedicated open-source developers can be co-opted by companies that have done almost none of the work, reaping several billions of dollars, while the developers who actually did the work make no money. It’s like opening your doors wide only to have someone come in, take your stuff, and sell it back to you.

        In contrast, in licenses like the GPL, there’s a requirement that if you use GPL-licensed code and modify it, your new code also has to be open-source under the GPL.

        • Fedora@lemmy.haigner.me
          32·
          11 months ago

          I love the free software ideals, but I think we’ve got a different understanding about what constitutes a good and a bad license. What many people seem to forget about software licenses is that there are these other countries besides America. They couldn’t care less about whatever judges rule over there. A good license is a dumb simple license that anyone can enforce in court with ease. A bad license is a convoluted license that crumbles like a house of cards in court. I read the GPL. It’s convoluted. It’s an opaque terms of service agreement riddled with legal boilerplate disguised as software license. A poor execution of the ideals I hold. I only use the GPL as a formality to say that I support the free software ideals, but I have zero confidence in enforcing the GPL.

          • Danny M@lemmy.escapebigtech.info
            3·
            11 months ago

            I’d like to correct you by saying that GPL is DEFINITELY enforceable in countries other than america. I can’t say about every country (tho that will be the case with every license), but for instance it’s definitely enforceable in europe. For example in Germany and France there have been a few lawsuits that the FSF helped carry out against immoral companies.

            GPL Enforcement Cases - FSFE

            If you’re in Germany the Institute for Legal Questions on Free and Open Source Software is a law firm that literally works only on enforcing the GPL, FOSS licenses and other technological human rights that are being ignored by big tech.

            If you want to be even more sure about European Enforcement you may want to checkout the EUPL v1.2 which is GPLv3 compatible.

            In other countries, such as Japan, the GPL is also enforceable, so long as you treat it the same way as copyright, so you’re willing to sue companies that you know are stealing from you (the FSF can help you if you can’t afford it).

            Russia and China don’t care, but… it’s Russia and China, that’s not really news, is it? :)

            EDIT: I will write a full article about the legal enforce-ability of FOSS licenses such as the GPL before the end of the year