Fonzie!

True, but saying Brew is unsafe but Flatpak isn’t, isn’t too odd, either.

I get that it’s less secure, but using verified flatpaks beats homebrew by a large margin.

Shame they didn’t mention that homebrew is a security nightmare and will happily download maliciously modified code

That’s so true, I was missing this part! With homebrew you’re at the mercy of whoever put the package out there, much like with installers (and nix to be fair)

Edit: omg then the author claims flatpak is better for security?!? It has the same nightmare security issues.

LMAO no‽ Flatpaks can be verified, and you can choose not to install unverified flatpaks (which you should!) They are also containerised pretty well by default, in case they’re malicious!

I’m just happy my boi nix got a shoutout.

I love having a packages file and a lock file, both user-specific rather than system-wide, offering reproducibility, stability and a good, central place where I can see what I did to debug.

Nobody said anything about the init system, though.

At least TikTok, YouTube possibly demonetises it

If anything, I think it’s people used to Windows or macOS that don’t want anything to change that tend to hate Linux systems; it’s not exactly Windows/macOS (and doesn’t run exactly the MS Office and Adobe suits) so they hate it.

Who censors “ass” on the Fediverse?
Or in an image for that matter!

[ The person editing this and has done plenty of research from multiple trustworthy sources. ]

That reads sus. Like “Trust me bro” in nicer words.

Often news sources make sure anything that could make their news source look bad, like controversial topics, are someone else’s exact words that they quote so you can’t be mad at them for calling it a “war crime”…

Archived link, just in case.

To add to @ParetoOptimalDev@lemmy.today

The uutils are MIT licensed, simply put it means “do whatever you want with it, as long as you credit us”.
The coreutils are GPL, simply put “do whatever you want with it but only in other GPL works, also credit us”.

The coreutils make sure forks will also be open source.
While the uutils aren’t closed source, they do allow you to make closed source forks.

The uutils’ license is too permissive.

I don’t mind using it for larger teams, it can be great for organised communication such as dev teams!

But it shouldn’t replace documentation.

(Also, Discord itself is a proprietary, censoring telemetry wasp nest, your FOSS dev team shouldn’t be organised in it but Matrix, XMPP, IRC channels or something else open.)

Likely not anytime soon as they tend to hold off latest features and prefer older (but maintained) LTS versions of just about everything. Also especially not if it turns out to be a bad idea; they explicitly build Mint without Snaps since their inclusion in the Ubuntu base.

Mainly memory safety; split (which is also used for other programs like sort) had a memory heap overflow issue last year to name one. The GNU Coreutils are well tested and very well written, the entire suite of programs has a CVE only once every few years from what I can see, but they do exist and most of those would be solved with a memory and type safe language.

That said, Rust also handles parallelism and concurrency much better than C ever could, though most of these programs don’t really benefit from that or not much since they already handled this quite well, especially for C programs.

uutils/Linux?

What is this table from? Is it from some website?

Yeah, but it shouldn’t replace forums.

Isn’t that just a bandwidth issue?

This is the way.