tlckl

2

tlckl wrote

It doesn't replace git or anything like that, what it does is that it calls a method in the libgit2 library to optionally color files and directories which have a particular git state. This is pretty basic interfacing, there is nothing feature bloat about this. In fact, it is often really useful as it spares you from doing ls AND git status or whatever.

2

tlckl wrote

It still follows the Unix philosophy. Exa optionally depends on libgit2, which is installed on every system with git on. The Unix philosophy doesn't say "you shouldn't let programs speak to each other", that's a complete misunderstanding of the Unix philosophy. Despite, it isn't unique to git, exa uses a generalized interface, which any VCS can integrate into.

2

tlckl wrote

RedoxOS?

Yup.

The only reason I'm really not a fan of Rust in base systems is that it breaks a certain uniformity that's becoming less and less common nowadays. Base UNIX systems having C, C++, shell, and Perl-- and local install containing everything else. They're the constants that have been in use for years and years-- while other languages pop into the limelight and then fade away into obscurity. It's almost certain C will remain relevant for a long time, despite it's downsides.

I suppose your talking about compiling package managers, because binary-wise there is no difference. Any good compiling package manager allows you to uninstall the build chain after use, so even then you don't need it installed on your system. The other thing is interfacing between libraries, and that's definitely an issue, but Rust is in the good end off languages there. It is really easy to interface with C libraries (it's a matter of a couple of lines). So I'll have to admit that I don't really see the downsides except for mere aesthetics of knowing your programs are written in a particular non-Rust language.

2

tlckl wrote

Honestly, I cringe whenever I hear "Rust" when it comes to system utilities-- but some people are down with rust creeping into their base system... The double-meaning is deliberate.

I'm a huge rust fan, working on a project to write an usable OS in Rust, and is a contributor to the Rust compiler and have designed several additions to Rust, so bear with me, but...

I actually don't think it is "creeping" into the OS. It's runtime-less, and there is nothing you need to install to run Rust programs on your computer, so it's essentially C or C++ wrt. binaries. The only difference is at the programmer side (and, of course, fewer memory safety bugs, which is nice for the user, I guess).

4

tlckl wrote (edited )

quote mining nonsense.

Claiming that it assists the Assad regime is total nonsense. They are incompatible in their goals.

PKK isn't a stalinist party. It is based on Öcalan's theories, which in turn derives from Bookchin-ist thought.

For nationalism, it was nationalist early on, but as it got more land, the ethnostate was dropped in favor of a multi-cultural and multi-ethnic goal, which is also why it has been debated if they should rename "Kurdistan", because it extends beyond Kurds.

The fact that they ally with USA and other is natural as they would collapse otherwise. That doesn't mean they're puppets however.

It's true that classes aren't abolished yet. However, you can't expect this to happen over night, and Rojava is certainly moving towards it.

Also, the way a revolution should be judged is how much it improves the conditions of people. Rojava improved the conditions of women from a socially conservative level to a point where women can do almost anything they want (note that it's not like it is perfect yet or anything with repsect to sexism, but it is significantly better than before). They collectivized various natural resources, causing poverty to drop. They removed most authority, etc.