66
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2025
66 points (92.3% liked)
Linux
55193 readers
770 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Yes. Ubuntu has two main repos, main and universe.
main is relatively small and includes everything that comes with Ubuntu by default. Canonical secures this repo with security fixes for everyone.
universe is not officially supported by Canonical. It's updates are done by community members. However, Ubuntu started a service called Ubuntu Pro / ESM that provides updates for packages in universe. It's opt in because Canonical wants companies using Ubuntu to pay for Pro in order to help fund Ubuntu. However, Pro is also free for personal use on up to 5 machines, so there's no reason not to enable it. f it was enabled by default then no one would pay for it.
Since it's all free software, what gives Ubuntu the privilege to restrict these updates behind paywalls and signups?
Fuck that bullshit. We shouldn't be encouraging or enabling this behavior at all.
GPL does not restrict you from selling the software, though you can't stop getting distributed by someone who bought it. Even RMS himself sold Emacs back in the day.
EDIT: I'm not saying it's justified in moral sense, I think it sucks ass. But it's not against the license.
Oh god, we know.
Practically speaking though, if anyone can redistribute it for free then it's available for free.
You don't seem to understand the difference between free as in freedom and free as in beer that is literally the cornerstone of the free software community.