←back to thread

Wild – A fast linker for Linux

(github.com)
383 points hkalbasi | 2 comments | 24 Jan 25 16:25 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
pzmarzly ◴[24 Jan 25 16:55 UTC] No.42815005[source]▶
Ever since mold relicensed from AGPL to MIT (as part of mold 2.0 release), the worldwide need for making another fast linker has been greatly reduced, so I wasn't expecting a project like this to appear. And definitely wasn't expecting it to already be 2x faster than mold in some cases. Will keep an eye on this project to see how it evolves, best of luck to the author.
replies(5): >>42815102 #>>42815606 #>>42816517 #>>42819089 #>>42819826 #
panzi ◴[25 Jan 25 03:05 UTC] No.42819089[source]▶
Why does AGPL Vs MIT matter for a linker?
replies(4): >>42819229 #>>42819957 #>>42820650 #>>42821513 #
cies ◴[25 Jan 25 13:26 UTC] No.42821513[source]▶
iirc the mold author wanted to make money off of it (and I dont blame him).

AGPL is avoided like the plague by big corps: same big corps are known for having money to pay for licenses and sometimes (yes, I look at you Amazon) being good at deriving value from FLOSS without giving back.

iirc AGPL was used so everyone can just use it, big biz is still compelled to buy a license. this has been done before and can be seen as one of the strategies to make money off FLOSS.

replies(1): >>42823430 #
1. dspearson ◴[25 Jan 25 18:22 UTC] No.42823430{3}[source]▶
Under what circumstances would commercial companies be required to buy a license?! If they provide Linking as a Service?
replies(1): >>42823710 #
2. cies ◴[25 Jan 25 19:00 UTC] No.42823710[source]▶
They probably wont NEED a license, but --as said-- big corps dont touch AGPL with a ten foot pole because legal. So it's just to shut up legal, most likely.