I think that people are negative towards rust utils, not because of rust or attachment to an old software but because they are not licensed under GPL or another copyleft license. Even if they become faster and more stable in the future, this is a flaw that will not be ignored.
No, an example where a modification to coreutils was open sourced by a commercial company that might otherwise not have.
The GPL has been reasonably effective in some cases like the Linux kernel and KHTML at getting companies to release their modifications. But I don’t see that as being significant for coreutils because a) most companies would have zero need to modify them, and b) they could just use the BSD versions if they really wanted.
I think that people are negative towards rust utils, not because of rust or attachment to an old software but because they are not licensed under GPL or another copyleft license. Even if they become faster and more stable in the future, this is a flaw that will not be ignored.
Tell me one time when GNU coreutils being GPL has had any effect whatsoever.
I am not sure how to answer that. Are you asking me to give you an example that the GNU coreutils were not used in a closed sourced s/w?
No, an example where a modification to coreutils was open sourced by a commercial company that might otherwise not have.
The GPL has been reasonably effective in some cases like the Linux kernel and KHTML at getting companies to release their modifications. But I don’t see that as being significant for coreutils because a) most companies would have zero need to modify them, and b) they could just use the BSD versions if they really wanted.