• Daniel Quinn@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Is it GPL though? If this is a case of MIT-licensed stuff weaseling its way into Linux core utils, I’m not interested.

      • Daniel Quinn@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 minutes ago

        This is what I had for posting at 1am. Thanks for the clarification. Yeah I just assumed it was the same situation as coreutils.

    • mogoh@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      Where is the problem when something mit-licensed is in core utils?

      Edit: sudo isn’t even a core util.

      • Daniel Quinn@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Granted, sudo isn’t in coreutils, but it’s sufficiently standard that I’d argue that the licence is very relevant to the wider Linux community.

        Anyway, I answered this at length the last time this subject came up here, but the TL;DR is that private companies (like Canonical, who owns Ubuntu) love the MIT license because it allows them to take the code and make proprietary versions of it without having to release the source code. Consider the implications of a sudo binary that’s Built For Ubuntu™ with closed-source proprietary hooks into Canonical’s cloud auth provider. It’s death by a thousand MIT-licensed cuts to our once Free operating system.