4 ms·
Ah, thanks for the precision. How do distributions typically handle that? And why does GNU feel the need to patch rustc, is it for things that can't be upstream
by c-cube 7y ago
Ah, thanks for the precision. How do distributions typically handle that? And why does GNU feel the need to patch rustc, is it for things that can't be upstreamed?
- tmcb 7y agoSomebody with better knowledge of that will hopefully chime in. My impression is that most of the distributions either don't patch upstream besides the build recipes, and upstream maintainers turn a blind eye to that. The ones that do, though (e.g. Debian), take the approach described on the OP and rebrand it (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_software_rebranded_by_Debian#Iceweasel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_software_rebranded_by_... ).
- steveklabnik 7y agoI’m not aware of any distro that rebrands Rust. You can see Debian's patches to rustc here: https://sources.debian.org/patches/rustc/1.34.2+dfsg1-1/ https://sources.debian.org/patches/rustc/1.34.2+dfsg1-1/
- oconnor663 7y agoI feel like the expression "turn a blind eye" is overstating things a bit. My understanding is that Mozilla can permit whatever they please with their trademarks. There's no expectation that they should be particularly strict. (Unlike, say, law enforcement, where there is an expectation that they should be strict, and turning a blind eye is a gray area.) Maybe I'm splitting hairs here though.