Egregoros

Is there actually any Linux distro that isn't governed by retards that want to keep breaking things?

Yeah, we will just drop this very popular package in a month, because we are autistic about dropping Qt5 and are removing packages using it.
image.png

@phnt GNU Linux-libre

@Suiseiseki
>GNUslop Linux-Libre
>not governed by retards
You clearly didn't read my post

@phnt @Suiseiseki if you think gnu is slop, then you shouldn't have ever so much as considered a gnu - hurd + linux distribution viable in the first place, since they all use a slop shell, a slop libc implementation, slop core utilities, a slop c compiler, a slop build system, and dozens upon dozens, if not hundreds, of other slop programs all under a slop license.

@HatkeshiatorTND @Suiseiseki Correct, that's why I'm never using more of that slop than absolutely necessary. The perfect Linux system is one without GNU.

@phnt @Suiseiseki that can't exist, because linux itself is distributed under the gnu general public license (version 2.0-only)

@HatkeshiatorTND @phnt @Suiseiseki You don't need GNU userland for Linux though. Do you think Google does that?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toybox

@sendpaws @HatkeshiatorTND @phnt You're clueless.

You need countless GNU programs if you want to merely compile Linux to use it.

Coreutils is only one package that is a small fraction of the userland and toybox is as useful as a box of toys and why play with toys, when you there's the real GNU coreutils?

@Suiseiseki @HatkeshiatorTND @phnt toybox is a clone of busybox. Ubuntu is moving to uutils for some reason which is MIT licensed. Many illumos distros have gnu stuff in the userland, but illumos-gate is the old Solaris 10 userland under CDDL. BSD is BSD and they reject anything GPL after V3.

@sendpaws @HatkeshiatorTND @phnt Coreutils is only one package - it is only a small fraction of the system.

Ubuntu likes to torture its used.

BSD projects regard all GPL versions as equally unwanted, as their proprietary masters can't take such software, make it proprietary and use it against them.

@Suiseiseki @HatkeshiatorTND @phnt >BSD projects regard all GPL versions as equally unwanted, as their proprietary masters can't take such software, make it proprietary and use it against them.

Actually no, I know for a fact that FreeBSD and OpenBSD still used GCC 4.2.1.
https://www.phoronix.com/news/GCC-4.2-EOL-FreeBSD
https://www.cambus.net/the-state-of-toolchains-in-openbsd/

NetBSD doesn't care. They use newer GCC.

@sendpaws @HatkeshiatorTND @Suiseiseki

They use newer GCC

They still use GeePeeLv2 GCC for the system. There is a build.sh option to build everything with LLVM though.

@phnt @HatkeshiatorTND @sendpaws LLVM is not self-hosting - if you want to build LLVM, there's either the option of mystery meat binaries or GCC.

@Suiseiseki @HatkeshiatorTND @phnt @sendpaws unlike the glorious gcc with options of mystery meat binaries or nothing?

@menherahair @HatkeshiatorTND @phnt @sendpaws Glorious full source bootstrap GCC; https://guix.gnu.org/en/blog/2023/the-full-source-bootstrap-building-from-source-all-the-way-down/

@Suiseiseki @HatkeshiatorTND @menherahair @sendpaws You only need a compiler from 20 years ago. Amazing win.