/fglt/ - Friendly GNU/Linux Thread

cringe

gnu is free of charge but not free!
You have to give away your morals and rights to use gnu.

Are there any other distros that have an AUR equivalent?

Just heard about RPM Fusion, not quite sure if it's similar but I'm gonna check that one out tonight.

After just learning bash is it worth it to start learning a programming language or or continue with bash scripting?

Whats wrong with Antergos?

False. You just fell for some memes and don't actually know anything about gnu

Buggy derivative shite

Why is gpl copyleft, but is copyrighted and non modifiable?
THIS IS A VIOLATION OF THE MODIFICATION RULE GPL AND RICHARD STALLMAN PREACH.

If you use gpl, you sign away all your rights to your software.
FSF is about religious beliefs and not technological quality.

gnu is anti competitive, and forces users to comply with their thin scope of software(such as anti-competitive practices with gcc plugins built in to the kernel).

The only meme here is that you believe the fsf and richard stallman's scripture.

gentoo has portage overlays which are like private repositories

libertybsd?

"Arch for babies".
Brings literally nothing to the table and has no reason to exist.

how do i install a program with out using the repositories? for example i have downloaded the latest version of compton and was wondering the command line to install it (i know i can use apt-get install compton but i want to learn how to install something that i have download it) xubuntu btw

There is so much bullshit here I don't know whether to call you delusional or congratulate you.

First of all there is a difference between the GNU project and the GPL. They are not the same thing. Second of all, if the GNU project was
>anti competitive
they would have never made the GPL. It's an aggressive license to make open source software cometitive with proprietary

>sign away all your rights
>all your rights
This is how I know you're not here to actually discuss the issue either, and this tells me that you just want to preach and try and meme others into think you're right. Becsuse I KNOW not even you actually believe those words.
Therefore you are not worth responding to further. Just want everyone to know that you're full of shit and I'll be ignoring you now. Good day.

>gnome
cringe
>xiaomi
based
>cd ~
you can just do cd

So, this is the power of Debian """Stable"""?

Attached: Screenshot from 2018-11-13 14-52-09.png (1600x900, 923K)

ffy:

if it's a .deb file
# dpkg -i /path/to/file
# apt-get install --fix-broken
the latter isn't strictly necessary
if it isn't a .deb file and is just an archive or something you should treat it a bit like a 'portable' install, you can copy it to system folders and try to """install""" it manually but it's not recommended, the recommended way to deal with this is to just add the path to the folder to your local $PATH var and treat it like you would any random binary

More like debian stale.

fuck it, installed ibus and mozc and cant get this shit working. is there any distro where it comes with ibus + mozc out of the box?
honestly switching language shouldn't be this fucking difficult

>It's an aggressive license to make open source software cometitive with proprietary
Why are they anti-competitive to LLVM/Clang in patching out gcc hard lined plugins in the kernel?
Are they are afraid of competition? Why wouldn't they want a more open compiler environment? Where all parties benefit from free code?

>This is how I know you're not here to actually discuss the issue either,
If you ever use gpl on any software, you have to use gpl on it for the rest of your life. You cannot change to another license out side of gpl.

>you dont believe those words
I do and wholeheartedly do not like or agree with gnu or gpl.
And there is nothing you can do to stop me or prevent me from shoowing others the dangers of the fsf,gnu,gpl and richard stallman.

~choosealicense.com/licenses/gpl-3.0/

Attached: gpl.png (307x201, 14K)

im trying to install compton and i think i dont have the latest version, does anyone happen to know whats the latest version and where to get it from? also it isnt a .deb file, its more like a .pkg.tar.xz which desu idk what to do with

github.com/yshui/compton/releases/tag/v4-rc4 this is what im trying to install

just do 'apt-get install compton', you're not going to learn anything by trying to install it manually

that is a source release only, follow the 'how to build' instructions
it's also a development branch and probably not stable

Is there a way to quickly switch between WM's? I find myself switching back and forth between XFCE and i3 for casual use and programming respectively. I know people use i3 as a replacement for xfwm, but is there a way to dynamically switch between the two while keeping all my windows open?

Attached: catgirl.png (2068x1453, 1.86M)

kill yourself out of the thread.

>butthurt stallman fag unable to deal with superior changes

Nothing. I'm a regular Arch user and install it on devices when I'm too lazy to install arch again. Extensive use of it proves almost no difference to me. I also rather like its GUI (gasp!) package manager.

That being said, if you weren't lazy like me and just wrote an install script for Arch, it would be a better option.

Ok, so now my Manjaro won't boot at all anymore.

Can anyone recommend a decent OS that works and isn't Ubuntu?

Attached: sad anime grill.png (1280x720, 564K)

fedora

>gnuless
based
>systemdless
cringe
they both suck, arch itself sucks since they put whatever the fuck they want on upstream; AKA the updates will break your system often.
Debian is better than mint, mint is almost as old as debian so what the fuck is the point, like even Ubuntu has better security than that pajeet tier os. Don't fall for the meme of arch, the way they package makes it so it looks like less packages, but actually one package has more shit than one debian/ubuntu package. So when you install exactly the same on ubuntu and on arch, ubuntu will have more free space than arch; but arch will have fewer package count on a fetch script, that doesn't mean it's slicker. What you can really say about arch is that is less modular than ubuntu, you can't decide what to install and what not. That's why real powerusers won't use arch, just kids that think they know what they are doing. A real power user uses Debian or Gentoo.

what did you do?

>Why is gpl copyleft, but is copyrighted and non modifiable?
copyleft refers to a free licence that is protective of the freedoms it guarantees, if you licence your software under bsd or mit any big corporation like microsoft can stick your software in a proprietary program and not release source ever, this is more permissive but it also means that the freedoms aren't protected for future people
I have no idea what you mean by 'is copyrighted and non-modifiable', software licenced under the gpl is fully modifiable and redistributable so long as it adheres to the conditions laid out by the gpl, the gpl is copyrighted to the fsf, if you licence your software under the gpl you still maintain full copyright ownership of your code as usual
>If you use gpl, you sign away all your rights to your software
absolutely 100% factually wrong, I can see where you're coming from but it also applies to the bsd and mit licence and is also wrong there
>and forces users to comply with their thin scope
yes, see also: copyleft, protective free licence

>If you ever use gpl on any software, you have to use gpl on it for the rest of your life.
if you develop software under the gpl you can later relicence it under any licence you want, if other people have a copy of the software you licenced as gpl are free to modify and redistribute it as you've granted them a licence to do so
>You cannot change to another license out side of gpl.
you can *always* change the licence of software you develop that you still maintain copyright to even if it's gpl (i.e., you did not assign copyright to another developer or company), what you cannot do is retroactively go and revoke the branch of software you licenced as gpl or relicence other peoples code licenced under the gpl that you do not use ownership to
this is *no* different to bsd/mit

How do I rotate my second screen's orientation form the terminal with xrandr? My main screen would be xrandr -o right/left/etc, but I cant big brane my way into doing this for the second screen. What would I replace -o with?

Attached: 1541560254468.png (580x548, 369K)

How do I add those application shortcuts that's between the whisker menu and the window buttons in the top left corner?
(I'm using Xubuntu 18.04)

Attached: 1542032483278.png (1440x900, 634K)

AQUA NO
install Debian Stable or Fedora/CentOS. With Fedora you have newer software but you have to get it from rpmfusion, it's more stable than ubuntu lts and arch for sure. Don't ever use arch is bad at the core concept of packaging. Stick with debian + gnome, although if you want or need wayland use fedora since on debian it still not stable. Fedora gets things working faster than debian. Those are the 2 big binary distros you should care desu. Gentoo is out of the question but I guess it would be pretty stable, but for me it makes no sense compiling the fucking system, it's too much time if you have older machines, even on new hardware is just waste of electricity and time

it would be something like
xrandr --output --rotate normal/inverted/left/right
where output name is the name of the device when you run just xrandr (i.e., DisplayPort-0)

>'is copyrighted and non-modifiable'
Stoppe reading there.You dont even understand the license your paise so much
"BUT CHANGING IS NOT ALLOWED"

>if you licence your software under the gpl you still maintain full copyright ownership of your code as usual
I can freely fork your software and do what ever the fuck i want with it and you cannot do anything to stop me because you signed your rights away when you used gpl

Attached: gpl2.png (929x198, 27K)

how can i select and delete multiple lines inside the terminal? id like to replace a command

You're wrong my friend, but I guess there's nothing to do about it, which is sad and leaves me wondering what GNU/FSF/RMS did to you that you feel so much hate against them.

I fixed it, just start xorg instead of wayland.
To be honest debian doesn't live up to its name, Centos and RHEL are more stable while having relatively new software. GNOME on rhel is 3.28 just as an example, I don't know what version of wayland does that use, but is perfectly fine. I don't get the meme about Centos being older than debian when centos/rhel have newer software

Deleting lines from a file?

>"BUT CHANGING IS NOT ALLOWED"
you cannot change the gpl licence document, you can however modify the *code* that is licenced under the gpl
>I can freely fork your software and do what ever the fuck i want with it
no, you can do whatever the gpl permits you to do, you cannot relicence my code to a non-gpl compatible licence for instance because the gpl forbids this
>because you signed your rights away when you used gpl
in this case I GAVE you those rights to do whatever the gpl permits, you fucking brainlet

You must be trolling. Please tell me you're trolling.

Attached: 1541993232686.jpg (600x551, 118K)

debian

trying to edit a command

You absolutely cannot. You need a second drive.
Do you still have the SSD?

That's not what he's asking. He wants to know if dd will keep running if you're using it to read from a file, and then wipe the partition table of the device the file is stored in mid-read.
If you know this to work, that's great, but if it doesn't, user's gonna lose his savegames.

stable refers to older software where the bugs are known and discovered and isn't likely to have newer bugs pop up, it makes no claim about being bug free or actually 'stable' in the traditional sense

You can hit CTRL+x+e to open the current command in your EDITOR, if that's what you want.

Mint

She said "decent".

I think I accidentally the whole kernel.
Thx guise, I'll try out CentOS!

Thanks! Much appreciated fren.

Attached: 1541535325974.png (640x478, 431K)

>you cannot change the gpl licence document, you can however modify the *code* that is licenced under the gpl
Then the GPL document it self violates the freedom(modification) that it preaches its self.
Hypocritical.
>no, you can do whatever the gpl permits you to do, you cannot relicence my code to a non-gpl compatible licence for instance because the gpl forbids this
China says hello
>in this case I GAVE you those rights to do whatever the gpl permits, you fucking brainlet
99% of people who use gpl blindly apply it because stallman and fsf spend MILLIONS in advertising(from donations) to push gpl in the limelight. When in reality, you're signing your death warrent to any code you use gpl with.
All because stallman hasent crated anything since 1981(and it wasnt a "creation" it was a fork...) and dosent have any other way of obtaining code.

To clarify, the image isn't mine. I want mine to look like this.

Perhaps you shouldn't have interjected so much and hostlily took over this thread(it was /flt/ for 2 years before you took it over)

yeah I haven't done anything yet, i was going to test it. The ssd is what I'm running debian on right now.
So as soon as the start of the partition gets writted it's gonna fail?

so what the fuck should I use then. Debian is a clusterfuck of shit that doesn't work, there's a lot of shit that will pop an error, ubuntu is even shittier

im in the command line trying tto edit compton but to delete everything i have to press the delete key untill it finishes deleting everything

Mint is as retard friendly as it gets which seems to be right up his alley
Also
>she

Is Lubuntu my best bet If I want to have a Linux that is unbloated ass possible? Really want to safe some RAM.

Ctrl+w for a word, Ctrl+u for everything

>Then the GPL document it self violates the freedom(modification) that it preaches its self.
>Hypocritical.
there is nothing hypocritical about this, a licence where you can change freely modify the licence is not worth the paper its written on
>China says hello
that would be a violation of the gpl and therefore a violation of copyright/intellectual property laws and would be a matter for the courts to sort out, other people breaking the law has nothing to do with the gpl
>When in reality, you're signing your death warrent to any code you use gpl with.
you can relicence code you have copyright ownership to anything you want, what you cannot do is retroactively revoke licences you've granted to other people
for the final time bsd/mit does nothing different in this regard

install void

>Falling for the Debian meme

Attached: 1512191756428.gif (193x200, 2.2M)

Well, like I said, I haven't actually tried it. Because it's a dumb idea. You're not even supposed to repartition devices when they're mounted, let alone actively being read by a process you vitally need to complete with no errors.
I'd recommend writing the image back to the SSD, booting debian from a USB stick or similar, and then writing it to the HDD directly from the SSD. Can you put your other files somewhere for safekeeping while both your hard drives are in use?

emacs is shit just type set -o vi to use vi mode
you're welcome, add it to .bashrc

...

I thought the project is dead since the main developer did a hero?

NONONONONONOOO WHY THIS HAPPENS TO ME

Attached: mpv-shot0230.jpg (1916x1080, 219K)

An hero*

yeah, don't fall for memes. could also net install debian with lxde
I don't think it would fail actually, I mean if it reads block by block, dd doesn't care about the partition table, that's the point of using it, so it will keep reading and writing regardless of being mounted or not, dd doesn't need the device to be mounted on the filesystem. I'm gonna try on a usb with a iso just to prove the concept

you meant that to me right?

how can I completely de-gnu my Linux system?

personally I use fedora on desktops and centos on servers, but I'm just letting you know that 'stable' in linux software generally means stable in reference to the stage of development and not how crash resistant the software is

I did not, my bad, however:
>but to delete everything i have to press the delete key untill it finishes deleting everything
familiarise yourself with readline
readline.kablamo.org/emacs.html

use a busybox/musl distro

sudo rm-rf --no-preserve-root "${GNU}/"

which one?

anyone you want there's only a handful of them
alpine is extremely minimal and barebones but looks to be the nicest

Install Android.

No, there are linux distros much more stripped than that. Some to the point of being unusable. You don't want "as unbloated as possible", you should be aiming for "sufficiently unbloated for this particular hardware".

>you can relicence code you have copyright ownership to anything you want,
YOU.
CAN.
NOT.
If you use gpl for your code, you can only change to other GPL like licenses.
~gnu.org/licenses/license-compatibility.en.html

I don't like alpine, any alternatives?

Well, if you're sure. Good luck. Post results.

Read what she wrote again, note the "code you have copyright ownership to" part.

>systemdless
>cringe
I dont agree with the monolithic and unpermissive nature of system.
Programs DEPEND on systemd, which makes no fucking sense
>pic related
I dont know how this retard got this far in to the tech world, but i dont trust any code he has ever made to not be a 0day or otherwise a root elevation exploit.

When you release software and choose a free license for it, it means that *others* then have a free license for your software. *You*, the developer, can do what you want with your software, inclusive making it proprietary, stuffing botnet into it and enslaving the planet.

>If you use gpl for your code, you can only change to other GPL like licenses.
you can relicence the code to gpl-compatible licences, however this is mostly for end-users of your code
if you have copyright ownership of the code (i.e., you wrote it, and you have not assigned the copyright to any other person or project) you can choose to stop releasing your software under the gpl and release it under a different licence for for the future - this does not mean you can go back and retroactively revoke the gpl licenced software you put out because you gave them permission to modify and redistribute it forever so long as it remains complaint with the gpl and in a gpl like or gpl compatible licence
this is no different to the bsd/mit licence other than bsd/mit allowing more permissive sublicencing options

You cannot change the license to a non gpl license, its fucking explained in the gpl.
~gnu.org/licenses/license-compatibility.en.html

You cant.
Not only can you not change it from gpl to another license, you have to have anyone that contributed code authorize the change in license
~gnu.org/licenses/license-compatibility.en.html

>(i.e., you wrote it, and you have not assigned the copyright to any other person or project) you can choose to stop releasing your software under the gpl and release it under a different licence for for the future
~gnu.org/licenses/license-compatibility.en.html