As the saying goes, don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.

You’re the one doing that. It was your choice to bring up an article which is full of manipulative language to make your point. It was your choice to bring up irrelevant facts about Canonical employees in your post.

Since the article was published on March 19, I wonder if much of it, revolving around what the author saw as indications of authoritarianism, came from heavy disquiet in the face of authoritarianism’s recent gaining hold of the White house.

How is that an excuse for making shit up?

AFAIK, Rust is mainly funded by the Rust Foundation, which not only includes Microsoft, but also includes comrades from Huawei and alike.

So does Linux Foundation. What’s your point?

You are completely missing the point here. You replied to OPs comment about licensing with a comment about incompatibilities in code. My comment was about licensing.

But the post is about an article by Sami Tikkanen/Roy Schestowitz (not really sure who the author is) and my answer is in context of that post. Like I’ve said, if you want to discuss licensing policies and how uutils affects future of FOSS, don’t use manipulative trash articles as starting point. Write a coherent post where you present factual information and than we can talk.

If wanting to keep FOSS as FOSS is disgusting to you why are you in this community in the first place?

It isn’t. But author of the article and OP are lying and using manipulative language to discredit people they disagree with. That’s what I find disgusting. I criticise the article because I don’t want such people representing copyleft licenses.

Issue is that author stated that ‘Rust people’ are authoritarian and that they chose to reimplement coreutils to impose authoritarian control over FOSS. This is not grounded in reality. Unless you also want to claim that ‘BSD people’ are authoritarian, the author presents no valid point of discussion.

If you want to discuss consequences of uutils being under permissive license, feel free to write a coherent fact-based post about that. Article you’ve cited makes you no favours. If anything, based on the article and your post all I noticed is ‘how disgusting people many GPL proponents are.’

Your criticism omits the passages about usage of the MIT license over the GPL (the ones I quoted in the post).

I’ve addressed it:

Why are you so sure that there will be incompatibilities? The stated goal of the project uutils is ‘to be a drop-in replacement for the GNU utils’ and ‘differences with GNU are treated as bugs’.

[…]

This is pure speculation aimed to support a conclusion that the author has. uutils aims to be fully compatible and there are no indications that this goal isn’t sincere.

Discord on the website of the Rust project: That’s not a lie at all: it was the truth at the time of publication on March 19

I stand corrected regarding it being a blatant lie. However, the paragraph is still at least manipulative since nothing indicated that it was the primary communication platform. The forums were listed before it. At most you could argue Discord was primary chat platform, but even that is irrelevant considering that anyone who didn’t like Discord had an alternatives.

Sounds like the author is authoritarian and wants to dictate what people can and cannot use on the Internet.

How was this not a sign of flagrant disregard for free software and for people’s right to use the web however the fuck they want to use it

Last I checked Firefox and Chromium were free software and the forums work in both. Furthermore, if anything you should have issue with Discourse rather than Rust since that’s the software running the forums. Or better still, submit patches to fix compatibility issues.

Absolute trash article.

The first thing that I noticed back then

When is ‘then’? Because that affects the meaning of the rest of the paragraph. Prior to Rust 1.0 a lot of things changed in backwards-incompatible way. Currently, if you learn something, you can continue applying that knowledge.

I don’t want to learn something that does not last - that feels like a wasted time when I could also learn skills that remain usable to the far future.

Then software engineering is not a career for you. Maybe you could become a bricklayer because pretty much everywhere technologies changes and if you want to be at the top of the game you need to learn new skills.

That was long before I even noticed how disgusting people many Rust programmers are.

So are many C programmers. Or Python programmers. Or Heskell programmers.

If you go to the website of the Rust programming language nowadays, one of the first things you’ll notice is that their primary communication platform is Discord.

This is blatant lie. The first thing I see when I go to the website is that Rust has official Mastodon, Blueksy and YouTube channels. And if you go to Community page you’ll see the main communication channels are self-hosted forum, and Zulip.

Another thing that you notice immediately if you use an independent web browser is that their developer forum does not work. If you use a “non-supported” browser, or have JavaScript disabled, the webpage body has a CSS property “overflow-y: hidden !important;” which prevents the user from scrolling the page. On top of the page there is a banner that tells you to download one of the “supported browsers”, which are Firefox, Chrome and Safari.

What is the issue exactly?

Which leads me to the next point. Rust people are clearly hostile towards or generally against free software.

So let me get this straight, you’ve poisoned the well with lies and irrelevant information to prime readers to hate Rust and accept your point. Got it.

There will surely be small incompatibilities - either intentional or accidental - between the Rust rewrite of coreutils and the GNU/C version.

Why are you so sure that there will be incompatibilities? The stated goal of the project uutils is ‘to be a drop-in replacement for the GNU utils’ and ‘differences with GNU are treated as bugs’.

If the Rust version becomes popular […] the Rust people will start pushing their own versions of higher level programs that are only compatible with the Rust version of coreutils. They will most probably also spam commits to already existing programs making them incompatible with the GNU/C version of coreutils. […]

This is pure speculation aimed to support a conclusion that the author has. uutils aims to be fully compatible and there are no indications that this goal isn’t sincere.

Rust’s licensing is also problematic. The license has been worded in such a vague way that it may or may not allow forking or re-implementation. It may or may not require deleting all references to the word “rust” from a fork or re-implementation.

All of that is fully compatible with FSF and OSI definitions. There is nothing new in requirement that forks use a different name.

The rest seems to be just ‘Rust people’ generalisations and lies.

You’re so gracious that you allow people to pay to be beta testers for your proprietary app.

(Also, I hate to be that guy who calls everything AI generated based on some tiny markers, but the use of emojis makes me feel the post is AI generated with no, or minimal, human oversight which puts in question quality of your code).

First step is to shrink and possibly move around your existing partitions to make space for a new one. GParted Live may help with that. Once you have enough space, just install Arch there. If you already have separate /home you should be able to reuse it.

tldr: For Linux adoption it would be better for devs to focus on 2 (“main”) distros which are very similar to Windows and macOS and then 2-3 further (“big”) distros which give a bit more room to experiment. All the other distros create confusion and analysis-paralysis for the user who wants to switch or wants to help others to do the switch.

This is a mythical man-month fallacy. If everyone who works on distributions focuses on just a handful of them, that does not mean development will go any faster or lead to better outcomes.

Also observe that majority of work which ends up in GNU/Linux systems is outside of distributions. And this work often ends up quite focused.

The problem isn’t diversity of distributions. The problems are people who go on describing history of GNU/Linux when a newbie asks them what distribution to start with; and ‘top 10 Linux distributions’ articles which litter the Internet. Just the other day someone shared a link to Distrochooser, a website which gives newbies ten distributions to pick from.

When a newbie asks about Linux, point them at Linux Mint Cinnamon Edition and that’s it. Or at most ask if their primary use-case is playing games in which case recommend Bazzite. That solves the ‘problem’ of distribution proliferation.

See also New to Linux? Stick To These Rules When Picking Distro.

Why am I using the tool if I then have to read through several reviews anyway?

Also, a lot of smaller distributions are derived from a few larger ones. Therefore, they are usually not very different.

Yes, that’s the point. That’s why if a newbie asks, recommend one of the big ones.

In the end, it is more important to try, after gathering a reasonsble amount of information!

People who know nothing about Linux need a clear choice. If you’re giving them dozen suggestions, than the tool didn’t help them in any way.

Also, a lot of smaller distributions are derived from a few larger ones. Therefore, they are usually not very different.

There are a lot of choices

There are too many choices. I’ve tried the chooser and at the end it gave me 9 distributions to choose from (i.e. nine distributions with no marked negatives). I’ve tried again and it gave me 13 distributions to choose from. This is absolutely useless for someone who knows nothing about Linux.

If someone selects ‘I have little or no knowledge about Linux’ it should go straight to recommending Linux Mint or with no other questions. Or maybe Bazzite if they selected gaming as main use case.

And if I select Windows experience, why doesn’t it mark Ubuntu with a negative as it has more of a MacOS feel?

The other way is to get a -testing iso, but these usually are broken because most people “upgrade” their installed distro to testing instead of just install it outright.

I’ve installed Debian testing from ISO a handful of times and never had any issues.

What do you mean? They are included in the updates to -testing.

deleted by creator

VeraCrypt Volume Format Specification:

Each VeraCrypt volume contains an embedded backup header, located at the end of the volume (see above). The header backup is not a copy of the volume header because it is encrypted with a different header key derived using a different salt (see the section Header Key Derivation, Salt, and Iteration Count).

It may be possible to recover the encryption key. You might try asking on VeraCrypt forums/mailing lists or contacting a commercial data recovery service which understands VeraCrypt. Though I’m not familiar with VeraCrypt so I may be misunderstanding the cited documentation.

For doing stuff in a directory, I use a replacement for cd command.

For aliases:

alias +='git add'
alias +p='git add -p'
alias +u='git add -u'
alias -- -='cd -'
alias @='for i in'
alias c='cargo'
alias date='LANG=C date'
alias diff='cdiff'
alias gg='git grep -n'
alias grep='grep --color=auto'
alias ll='ls -o'
alias ls='ls -vFT0 --si --color=auto --time-style=long-iso'
alias rmd='rmdir'

I also have various small scripts and functions:

• a for package management (think apt but has simplified arguments which makes it faster to use in usual cases),
• e for opening file in Emacs,
• g for git,
• s for sudo.

And here’s ,:

$ cat ~/.local/bin/,
#!/bin/sh

if [ $# -eq 0 ]; then
	paste -sd,
else
	printf '%s\n' "$@" | paste -sd,
fi

Yeah, it has been slowly growing on me 😜. But I would like to explore all other options before I fully commit.

You’ve already discovered the best editor. There’s no need to explore more. ;)

What you have in title of the post, body of the post and in this screenshot all disagree with each other.

Use backtics to quote code fragments. Tripple backtics to block quote. You should be able to edit your post.