this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2026
26 points (93.3% liked)

Linux

13047 readers
309 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ISO@lemmy.zip -1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

And what would that goalpost be?

This would be really exciting if Canonical weren’t using this in part because it helps them de-GPL their Linux distro.

I pointed out that A LOT of core dependencies installed in your system right now are not GNU (the GNU in GNU GPL), and never been. You thought I was talking about GNU the project, not realizing I was actually talking about the license, which proved my point from months ago that people who talk like you are completely clueless about the licenses used by packages in their systems.

The supposition that the GPL dependence ratio is both high and getting significantly lowered is doubly wrong (both parts).

The claim that these moves are de-GPLing ones is also wrong, as trivially proven by the fact that the pattern doesn't even hold (Ubuntu moved to GPL chrony not long ago).

The "rug pull" theory, already invalidated by the falsity of the above suppositions, is independently incoherent, as explained in my previous comment from both a technical and a business/commercial/cost POV.

There are countless angles where an "I'm feeling smart corpos bad" wouldn't be invalid. This is not one of them.

[–] lengau@midwest.social 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Fwiw while I mostly agree with you, the G in GPL stands for General.

[–] ISO@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 days ago

Thanks for pointing that out. It was a case of conflating the two G's in "GNU General Public License".