i plan to package openrsync this weekend in alpine as an alternative to rsync (and probably switch the default rsync implementation in future)
-
that is also not relevant, but i am not sure that your assertion is true anyway, as at least one debian developer has suggested that the regressions are bad enough to revert back to the last non-LLM version.
@ariadne @dysfun @AmyZenunim Fedora, yes, that Fedora, the one pushing MCP nonsense and whatever else either held rsync back at the last non-slop version or rolled back
-
i plan to package openrsync this weekend in alpine as an alternative to rsync (and probably switch the default rsync implementation in future)
@ariadne Thank you!
-
sidebar: given that there is interest in alternatives to GPL software that is now being vibecoded, and these alternatives largely tend to not be copyleft...
will vibe coding mean the death of copyleft?
@ariadne copyleft didn't predict the creation of software that could trivially launder the functionality of the software through a process judged to be transformative...
...but Marx did!
-
i plan to package openrsync this weekend in alpine as an alternative to rsync (and probably switch the default rsync implementation in future)
@ariadne Oh, I was actually considering packaging openrsync myself in response to the recent release's bug reports (as a fail-safe for pmOS), but nice to see you beat me to it. I don't know enough about openrsync other than it is an OpenBSD version to really make any solid statements other than thanks
-
@ariadne Oh, I was actually considering packaging openrsync myself in response to the recent release's bug reports (as a fail-safe for pmOS), but nice to see you beat me to it. I don't know enough about openrsync other than it is an OpenBSD version to really make any solid statements other than thanks
@ariadne It is also very interesting reading the comments on this post with people explaining the entire ecosystem to you as if you know nothing about it...
-
i plan to package openrsync this weekend in alpine as an alternative to rsync (and probably switch the default rsync implementation in future)
@ariadne I haven't been paying particular attention. What's the problem with rsync? -
@ariadne I haven't been paying particular attention. What's the problem with rsync?
@me its now being coded by Claude and there have been regressions
-
@me its now being coded by Claude and there have been regressions
@ariadne Ugh. I use rsync daily. Thanks for the heads-up. -
i plan to package openrsync this weekend in alpine as an alternative to rsync (and probably switch the default rsync implementation in future)
@ariadne It'd be useful for them to update the "please wait" page with more detail.
It'll be nice having a more heterogenous ecosystem. Thanks in advance for your planned port.
-
i plan to package openrsync this weekend in alpine as an alternative to rsync (and probably switch the default rsync implementation in future)
@ariadne thank you
-
@ariadne
Bug#1138239: rsync: Consider reverting to pre-LLM version
https://bugs.debian.org/1138239@billchenchina @ariadne and avoid the latest security release with 6 CVE? 🤯
-
sidebar: given that there is interest in alternatives to GPL software that is now being vibecoded, and these alternatives largely tend to not be copyleft...
will vibe coding mean the death of copyleft?
@ariadne I don't know, but I've thought about this exact scenario way too much and it seems like it's at least a real concern.
I guess we'll see how the next few years play out.
-
that is also not relevant, but i am not sure that your assertion is true anyway, as at least one debian developer has suggested that the regressions are bad enough to revert back to the last non-LLM version.
interesting
-
sidebar: given that there is interest in alternatives to GPL software that is now being vibecoded, and these alternatives largely tend to not be copyleft...
will vibe coding mean the death of copyleft?
@ariadne I'd be a bit surprised, since copyleft is in theory a lot more legally resistant to being *used* for vibecoding. Not that courts will likely care, because when a corporation does it it's generally legal (though maybe I'm being too cynical, or not cynical in a complex enough fashion—the ongoing lawsuits from the NYT and such haven't been decided yet). But, it does seem like in the longer term this could naturally lead to people against LLMs using licenses that attach *more* stipulations rather than fewer.
As a random internet commentator, my specific prediction: by the end of this decade, we'll see reasonably wide and/or notable adoption of a software license that breaks the traditional taboo against having clauses like the CC NC clause where field of use is restricted. -
i plan to package openrsync this weekend in alpine as an alternative to rsync (and probably switch the default rsync implementation in future)
@ariadne I think about replacing rsync for several years.
Now I try to see how far I've got with the prototype of a pre-generated git-like bundle of metadata and http as transport protocol. Okay, only for non-chunked transfers.
-
@meena this is like discovering Jesus middle name was actually Lucifer @dalias @ariadne @AmyZenunim @dentangle
-
@ariadne @AmyZenunim Except in most cases it's the other way around. rsync is rather unique here. For example it's LLVM embracing slop and GCC rejecting it. Usually because these lines match up with "corporate techbro open source" vs "free software as a social program".
@dalias @ariadne @AmyZenunim linux is GPL and embracing LLMs.
-
@dalias @ariadne @AmyZenunim linux is GPL and embracing LLMs.
@dalias @AmyZenunim @ikke yes, but I think from a software reliability perspective, the kernel is still being appropriately reviewed for the most part.
the larger problem will be regressions from the smaller projects where we have solo maintainers using LLMs as a force multiplier without appropriate review, and so far that's where we are seeing regressions from what I've been noticing.
and this is nothing to say about the legal status of these projects given that mechanically generated code of any kind does not qualify for copyright protection under the Berne convention...
-
@ariadne Quite the opposite I think. I think it leads to a resurgence in interest in copyleft, since these are largely the projects not embracing slopware and the fraudulent "non-copyleft" "rewrites" are pandering to techbro asshats and the corporate AI-slop program.
@dalias it very well could be. but there's a lot of copyleft software adopting this stuff because the maintainers adopting it believe it can act as a force multiplier.
-
sidebar: given that there is interest in alternatives to GPL software that is now being vibecoded, and these alternatives largely tend to not be copyleft...
will vibe coding mean the death of copyleft?
anyway: mad respect for tridge.
the man has done far more for software freedom than most of us have.
but he is still a person, and people can easily be convinced by these LLMs that things check out when they actually don't.
they use very persuasive language. if you depend on them, you will inevitably commit mistakes that you should have caught, because nobody does a perfect job. nobody.
