WYVERTUX(7)
FAQ
WYVERTUX(7)




NAME

Wyvertux

SYNOPSIS

FAQ

CONTENT

Why?

Why not?

It’s probably not going to be a big distribution like Debian, Fedora, Arch, Alpine, or Void. It’s going to be a experiment, a “what if” scenario, a toy (if you will), and when I hit a ceiling, I’ll probably stop and archive Wyvertux (though since Wyverkiss is stable for my daily purposes so I’ll keep using it).

Why aren’t you including <insert software name here>?

Probably because it can’t be built with the Wyvertux toolchain (and I’m talking extremes here, so it needs glibc or gcc explicitly. If it just needs GNU bison/m4/non-toolchain library, we can still include it in main/ or encumbered/).

Do you hate GPL or GNU?

No to both.

If I hate GPL, all of Wyvertux’s stack will use permissively-licensed programs, and I will still use GNU ncurses (which is released under 3-clause BSD), but I ditched it. Without any suitable licenses like GPL, Linux won’t even exist. So the GPL is necessary and ultimately, a good thing. Some software should use GPL, and GPL software will remain in Wyvertux (barring technical problems), this includes any and all GPL3 projects, which the BSDs deliberately avoid (and the whole reason macOS stayed in bash 3.2 before its move to zsh).

If I hate GNU, I probably won’t be providing bash at all, which I personally use. Also, you have to admit that a lot of GNU tools (like grep) are just faster than its other counterparts. So, no harm to include them (assuming they can be built with the LLVM toolchain, of course).

Will you include software by GNU Project?

Yes. Some software can’t be built without GNU (e.g. mesa, without patches, needs GNU bison or Linux kernel itself requires GNU make). Thankfully, all programs we have do not link to GNU libraries.

Also, bash is good and GNU grep is much faster (and beneficial to kiss the package manager) so we also include it in gnu/ and let the alternatives system do the job.

Uh… GNOME is part of the GNU Project, right?

This is a touchy subject for some and honestly, I’m not really sure if my “conclusions” are right or wrong. Here’s one of my answers in my personal blog a while back.

GTK+ probably exists in every single distribution with a full-stack GUI with full-featured DE. And GTK+ was originally written for GNU GIMP. But how’s the status of GTK+ and all programs maintained by GNOME? Are they considered part of GNU Project?

The GNU Project maintains that GNOME is a part of GNU Project. However, GNOME has its own infrastructure. They don’t use GNU Savannah, they have their own download links (to be fair, they maintain a lot of projects), they also have their own GNOME Foundation instead of using the FSF as the vehicle. I also looked at their main website. Not a single reference to GNU Project made there [2], although they said they have the FSF as their “Supporting organizations” and FSF has one “Advisory Board” member in the GNOME Foundation. In short, GNOME is de facto independent of GNU.

[2] gnome.org (archived link)

I still don’t know if this is the right or wrong answer. Worst case, we just move GTK+ to gnu/ and GTK+ dependencies to encumbered/. So if one still wants to install graphical programs, they won’t have any trouble. In any case, as long as it can be compiled with the Wyvertux base toolchain, that’s good enough since that means one doesn’t need two different toolchains.