I understand that if your boss tells you to write MIT/Proprietary code, you do so. I just wish that the ones who had a choice would use GPL

I understand. I can’t argue against wanting to earn money and be told to do something. I just wish that those that have a choice would take the extra minute to use GPL

Because most corporations do not contribute their changes back if it’s MIT/BSD licensed

Look, I understand if your boss tells you to not write Open-source/only use MIT so they can profit off of it later on. But for the people who have a choice, why wouldn’t they? I don’t see how it hurts their bottom line.

I’m middle class and here I am raging on Lemmy about software licenses LMAO

I didn’t think most of them allow port-forwarding

In this case, yes. If you were altruistic toward the community, shareholders could instruct devs to use it anyway so it works out for both groups. Doesn’t work the other way around

I’m interested in the VPN you use

Sorry, I’m not much of a software dev so bear with me:

If the libraries are GPL licensed, is there a problem? Unless you’re editing the libraries themselves.

Now if the application is GPL licensed and you’re adding functionality to use other libraries, please push upstream. It helps the community and the author will more likely than not be happy to receive it

Exactly

Yeah I think it’s a much bigger pain on Android

I have and I’ve been left scratching my head both times. AppArmour just deals with files whilst SELinux has contexts - that’s the only operational difference I’ve needed to notice. I create custom policies and am on my way.

Exactly. I use setroubleshoot myself and it’s awesome.

I agree that creating custom policies for a bunch of apps day in day out will be tiring. But that is an argument against all MAC. I personally don’t want to see Linux going the way of abandoning MAC

I guess I can’t really fault that. Developers not interested in the license they use to publish code baffles me

What freedom in the sense of writing code does the GPL inhibit? GPL simply says that changes to the source must be published. MIT is just a scapegoat for companies to get stuff for free without helping the developer that’s giving their time and soul for it

Not using GPL or derivatives doesn’t force companies to publish changes (which are usually improvements) which harms the community

Do you feel that way about all MAC or just SELinux? AppArmour is similarly arcane when you’re in the zone configuring your application. TBH RedHat has troubleshooting instructions in their docs, I just Copts paste and edit as necessary and it doesn’t take that long. I guess I just spent more time at it

To be honest I had the exact same situation with AppArmor, and since then I have grown to like MAC. I know they’re doing it to keep me safe so I don’t complain. Honestly if people find MAC to be a hassle they should also in theory find file permissions and ACLs a hassle

SELinux is installed by default on RHEL derivatives like AppArmour is on Debian derivatives. Sure maybe it’s annoying to see a package you didn’t download explicitly but I still don’t see why it’s a big deal. I guess having to delve into SELinux in the middle of configuring another app will cause some pain

I think this is where the confusion happens.

I use SELinux at my job. I admit that I’m not a Linux expert, neither am I an SELinux guru. The only interaction I have with SELinux is:

• Oh, my app keeps dying even after I chown the relevant directories.
• Looks at SELinux AVCs
• Creates new policy and puts in the home directory for the application - example: I just did it for HAProxy this week.
• If I fucked something up and I know the other apps have their policy modules in their place, I just do a restorecon and spend 5 minutes going through the policies whilst reprimanding myself for my stupidity.

I’m being honest that is literally what’s it’s been like to use SELinux. For context, AppArmour is exactly the same situation but now I need to edit a file (I can be lazy and keep appending rules to it but that will bite me later). If we’re going down the path of SELinux being complex for daily usage, then all MAC has the same problem.

I admit that I would find it daunting to do this for a desktop environment. It’s there that I want a pre-configured SELinux policy OOTB. On servers though? It’s not a big deal for me.

Or maybe I missed something.

Altruism towards shareholders, not the open-source community