Pratique du Shadowing: Debian Linux GNU Coreutils Situation Is Crazy - Apprendre l'anglais à l'oral avec la vidéo
Création de la leçon...
1
TLDR, Debian literally never said they're swapping over to you, Uutils.
2
To the best of my knowledge, it is not even remotely being considered.
3
This is a complete and utter fabrication and misunderstanding of what took place on the Debian mailing list.
4
If you want to know why, stick around a little bit longer.
5
All of this started with this email from Collin Funk concerning unilateral decision making with respect to the core Utils package.
6
Hi, let me begin by mentioning that I am an active contributor to the GNU core Utils.
7
Very easy to confirm.
8
Here is the GitHub mirror.
9
As we can see, they are a quite active contributor.
10
And the email they have right here, colin.funk1 at gmail.com is the same email that is on their account.
11
This is the same person.
12
They are not lying.
13
They are a contributor.
14
I mentioned this for transparency.
15
Although this message primarily addresses social concerns I have rather than technical ones.
16
Therefore, I hope it is not discarded for being biased.
17
On May 8th, 2025, Julian Andres Klode requested the addition of the GNU core Utils package so that core Utils could be made a virtual package that dispatched to different providers.
18
So that is a year ago.
19
And that is right here in this separate bug report.
20
When it loads.
21
Thank you. The maintainer of the core Utils Debian package said that he would not make this change without discussion on Debian Develle.
22
That is right here.
23
Not at this time.
24
And not without discussion on Dash Develle.
25
And this is from Michael Stone.
26
Keep that name in mind for a bit later.
27
Which I feel is reasonable.
28
Remember, the core Utils is an essential package and therefore needs to be treated with extra care.
29
This change was obviously an attempt to make the lives of Canonical who employ Julian Andres Klode easier.
30
Because Canonical, with Ubuntu, they have adopted Uutils.
31
And if this is something that is available upstream and this is the default upstream, that is then less work for them to do.
32
As far as I can tell, the request to discuss this on Debian devel was never respected.
33
The only brief discussion of core Uutils on Debian devel since these events was some that noted the core Utils package in Debian Experimental used core Utils from packages to choose between GNU, UUtils, BusyBox, or ToyBox.
34
This is an important point here.
35
This was never a matter of just having UUtils replace GNU.
36
What they were doing here, what the experiment was, was providing a meta package that let you easily swap between any of these four implementations.
37
So you can go with the main GNU implementation, but the package would also have the ToyBox, the BusyBox, or the UUtils version.
38
And that package can be found right here.
39
Do note, this is experimental.
40
This is not SID.
41
This is not stable.
42
This is experimental.
43
This is a place where people are just throwing things at the wall.
44
People are trying things.
45
Things that are in experimental don't even necessarily make their way into something like SID.
46
With that being the case, it's still a terrible idea for an experiment.
47
Not because of UUtils though, because of BusyBox and ToyBox, far, far more mature projects.
48
I don't think it makes sense to provide core Utils from packages for implementations that aren't striving for full core Utils compatibility.
49
ToyBox and BusyBox are not trying to be GNU.
50
They are trying to be much, much lighter implementations.
51
They don't have all of the same GNU extensions.
52
They don't have all of the same GNU bugs.
53
And if you just replace GNU with BusyBox, you're going to break a lot of things because it's not GNU.
54
At the very least, with UUtils, its ultimate goal is to implement GNU.
55
Allowing multiple core Utils implementations change the features that maintainer scripts can expect to be available and restrict them to POSIX only.
56
People already started filing bugs about that.
57
This will also likely cause many packages to FTBFS or provide different content.
58
For instance, core Utils from BusyBox, which seems to be installed by default as part of the upgrade with this number right here, does not provide the dash M or dash S options of RealPath.
59
Their replacement by fully POSIX code is not trivial, and I am worried that this will end up with different open coded version of it with various kinds of bugs, possibly serious ones.
60
Now pay very close attention to that.
61
At this time, BusyBox was the default with this package, but nobody made any noise about BusyBox whatsoever.
62
BusyBox also does not fully implement GNU.
63
The difference between UUtils and BusyBox though, BusyBox has the express purpose of not doing that.
64
But nobody said a word.
65
Nobody cared.
66
Later on when Colin tried it though, UUtils was the default with that package.
67
Again, in Debian Experimental, which is not Debian Sid.
68
It is not Debian Stable.
69
It is the testing ground for random throw-at-the-wall ideas.
70
The main crux of this argument though, comes to this.
71
I also noticed that the UUtils website says the following.
72
Debian is also following Ubuntu's path toward making UUtils the default.
73
A Google Summer of Code 2024 project, improved support of the Rust Core Uutils in Debian, was mentored to accelerate the integration.
74
The package is also inherited by downstream Debian-based distributions, including Raspbian, Kali Linux, ParrotOS, PureOS, Deepin23, and obviously Ubuntu would be in there somewhere.
75
If we go to the UUtils website though, you will notice that that statement isn't actually there.
76
It's not that it never existed.
77
It was added about seven or so hours before that email was sent.
78
We'll get to why it's gone in just a sec.
79
Firstly, let's finish that email.
80
It seems that a small handful of people are unilaterally making the decision to switch the default Debian install from GNU Core Uutils to UUtils Core Uutils, which concerns me.
81
I had hoped the plan was to bring this up on Debian Devel as originally requested, but I've not seen any indication that is the case over the past few months.
82
The decision to change to UUtils Core Uutils in Ubuntu was quite controversial, as can easily be seen in various forum posts and bug reports.
83
I believe these changes which seem to be intentionally made in secret are an attempt to avoid reigniting said controversy.
84
I can understand this, as many have strong opinions as I do, and express them rudely, which is part of the reason I've avoided linking them.
85
However, I do not believe that it is best for Debian if decisions like this are made unilaterally in secret.
86
Therefore, I'm bringing awareness of this to Debian Devel.
87
Shortly after, Sylvestre Ledrue responded.
88
Sylvestre Ledrue is the lead maintainer of the UUtils project, the person who made this change to the UUtils website, who writes UUtils alongside some other people, but they're the main guy.
89
In response to the quote from his website, he says, it was poorly phrased.
90
I updated the wording and made this change here.
91
Remove incorrect info.
92
Removing the part that said Debian is also following Ubuntu's path toward making UUtils the default, and also adding potential integration.
93
Not saying it is going to happen, saying it might happen.
94
And you know what?
95
I might win the lottery.
96
Lots of things might happen.
97
Doesn't mean it's going to.
98
Except a single email, I haven't been involved in any conversation for Debian on UUtils versus GNU CoreUtils.
99
I wasn't even aware of the experimental work.
100
Adding further to this, Michael Stone, who again, is the maintainer of the CoreUtils package on Debian, note that the experimental package uploaded over a year ago with version 9.7-999 is a lower number than the current version in SID slash Forky 9.10-1.
101
As far as I know, this was an experiment in experimental, and I have been given no indication that there is an intent to upload to unstable without further public discussion and consensus.
102
And this is the guy that maintains the CoreUtils package.
103
Now, there are absolutely reasons to not like UUtils.
104
As outlined by Ted Tso, I will note that Ubuntu's rewriter CoreUtils breaks a number of test suites, including XFS tests, because its outputs are different, and this breaks golden output comparisons.
105
I expect it'll also break various scripts that sysadmins have in production.
106
Bug reports about FSTests being broken on Ubuntu have been rejected because it's perceived by kernel developers as Ubuntu just being silly.
107
Given that some rather the primary test regression is based on Debian, I would consider unfortunate and regrettable if CoreUtils were replaced by Canonical's Rust rewrite.
108
And that's before we consider the over 100 CVEs that were introduced by the rewrite of CoreUtils.
109
They also recently had this issue where it broke Ubuntu image builds, and whilst things have been getting better with the test suite, there is still quite a lot of the test suite which is not yet being successfully handled.
110
Some people have said, oh, look at that, the number of tests that failed, they went up.
111
No, no, no.
112
No, no, no.
113
The number of tests that failed went up because they added more tests that they were covering.
114
They weren't actually doing all of the tests in the first place.
115
UUtils is absolutely far from perfect.
116
There is still a lot of work to be done, and this is why most distros have not yet adopted it.
117
But let's focus on things which are actually happening.
118
This should have been the end of the discussion.
119
It was not the end of the discussion because eventually Julian Andrus Klode, who was originally mentioned by Colin Funk, decided to respond.
120
Just for the record, I added BusyBox and ToyBox variants and uploaded the package to Experimental per Helmut's request as he wanted to explore those alternatives.
121
Whether Debian wants to switch or not is not my decision.
122
Debian has a procedure for making changes, which is the maintainer doing whatever the F they want, and if anyone disagrees, escalating to the CTTE if necessary.
123
The maintainer chose to delegate their decision process to the mailing list, which is their prerogative.
124
But I do not have the means to start, lead, or even participate in discussions, so I offer the experiment that was requested, and if anyone wants to pursue this further, that's on them to coordinate.
125
Basically, somebody requested, hey, this would be an interesting idea to explore, let's do it in Experimental, and that was basically the end of it.
126
If anyone else wants to take it further, that's on them.
127
Back to Colin, just for the record, my issue is not at all with you adding variants, uutils or otherwise.
128
My issue is with you silently changing the CoreUtils package to be uutils CoreUtils.
129
Your message does nothing to address that point.
130
Again, this is in Experimental, which is not shipping to anyone, and also hadn't been touched in a very long time.
131
This is from months and months ago.
132
Also, as mentioned in my previous message, changing essential packages is not necessarily up to maintainer to do whatever the F they want.
133
Again, experimental.
134
If this was going to be something that made its way into Unstable, into Stable, then it would go through that discourse.
135
Just to reiterate, I had seen the Experimental update months ago, I agree that it's perfectly fine to do that.
136
The only reason I became concerned was upon seeing this text on a site managed by another Debian developer who does not maintain the CoreUtils package.
137
Debian is also following Ubuntu's path toward making uutils the default.
138
Considering that he's not maintaining the package, that should be a sign to you that maybe something is off here.
139
I do not think it is an unreasonable assumption to think that one would discuss this on Debian develop before making definitive claims like this.
140
Basically, his entire argument boils down to somebody on a third-party website who happens to also be a Debian maintainer said something that was wrong.
141
That's basically the argument here.
142
From Peter Penchev, well, in my opinion, it kind of is unreasonable.
143
Since the pack of maintainers said that no change would be made without discussion, another developer making a non-maintainer upload of CoreUtils to Unstable, not experimental, which is the place it actually did happen, would really be extremely, and I do mean extremely unusual, and it would be a cause for concern, but it never happened.
144
So your main worry stems from a sentence on the Uutils website, which has already been removed, possibly as a result of this thread.
145
No, directly as a result of this thread.
146
This is a problem you have about a statement that no longer exists because you pointed out it was wrong, and then the developer agreed that it was wrong, and then removed it.
147
So everything's fixed.
148
Everything is done here.
149
But another conversation stemmed off of this.
150
From Henryk Paluch, probably mispronounced your name.
151
Thank to Git, we can find exactly who and when published a statement that sparked this thread.
152
As I showed you earlier, it was introduced here.
153
It would be nice if Sylvestre Ledrue would explain on what source is based his claim that Debian is moving to Uutils.
154
Do you want to know the source?
155
He was overzealous in his claim.
156
That was his source.
157
That's it. And when it was pointed out to him, he removed it.
158
From Thomas Goyrand, I'm sure Sylvestre had the best intention.
159
Asking him to explain himself when so much has been said about this and when he already backed off feels like bullying.
160
It'd be nice if we tried to understand each other regardless of whether we decide on the GNU core Uutils versus Uutils.
161
This should be water under the bridge now.
162
Even Colin Funk, who was the one that started the entire discourse, says, I agree that this feels like bullying.
163
However, I don't disagree with Henryk that the plan doesn't feel dismissed.
164
Notice the site still says under the Why section, Ubuntu is already carefully but purposely adopting Uutils core Uutils.
165
Debian is following the same path and Microsoft offers it as well.
166
Again, this is a statement from a third party website about something that is not happening.
167
There is no plan.
168
There is no discourse that is happening here.
169
To that, Chris Hofsteadler replies, This site is not a Debian resource.
170
Discussing it on the Debian devel seems moot.
171
As long as there is nothing actually happening in Debian, let's please just close this discussion without further moving goalposts and accusing people.
172
Everything is done.
173
There is nothing to discuss here.
174
That doesn't stop people wanting to discuss things.
175
Henryk has another response, quite a long one this time.
176
If you want to go and read through all of this, feel free to do so.
177
But keep in mind, this is a bunch of problems about a thing that is not happening.
178
Literally not happening.
179
Like, at all, there is a huge impact of switching to Rust core utils in Debian.
180
Not happening though.
181
It's just not happening.
182
From there, Sylvestre Ledrue replied, As highlighted before, it feels like harassment and I'm not interested to have this conversation with you.
183
Please don't cc me in the future.
184
However, I am happy to have the conversation with my fellow Debian developers, all the amazing, and I mean it, GNU core utils maintainers like Colin.
185
This is what he means by it feels like harassment.
186
He is not talking about, you know, discussions about UUtils, the merits of the project, should we swap to it, shouldn't we swap to it.
187
He is talking about people constantly harping on about Debian swapping to UUtils, which, he removed the statement about it happening because it's not happening.
188
Any further discussion after that point is useless because you're discussing something that is not taking place, that nobody is pushing for, that is not happening, that he even removed the wrong statement about over a week ago.
189
Also, for anyone who thinks that Sylvestre hates core utils and is trying to kill core utils, have you looked at who the latest commits from?
190
It's from Sylvestre.
191
Sylvestre contributes code to core utils.
192
I bet you didn't know that.
193
Now, it is primarily in the context of test suites because he's building his own core Uutils implementation.
194
There's going to be a bunch of areas where things are not properly being tested.
195
There are assumptions being made about how something should work, but nobody's actually formalized the test for it.
196
Just so we're on the same page here, so everyone understands what took place here about a year ago.
197
A package was made in Debian Experimental, which is the place for doing experiments, not necessarily going to be adopted, for turning core Uutils into a meta package, which then links out into other implementations of core utils.
198
Uutils being one of them, but it had Toybox, Busybox, and the GNU version as well.
199
The GNU version, the one that most of us are using.
200
Then back in June of this year, a core utils developer decided to discuss this and found a message on the Uutils website that basically said that Debian was going to swap to Uutils sometime in the future.
201
The Uutils maintainer saw this email and said, you know what?
202
I was overzealous with this and removed the comment from the website.
203
The package that had been in experimental for over a year is still an experimental because it's an experiment and it hasn't really been worked on.
204
It's actually older than the packages that are in mainline Debian.
205
Then after it was removed, people kept bugging Sylvestre, the maintainer of Uutils, about a statement he already stepped back from that he already removed from the website.
206
He gets annoyed and now people think that Debian is switching to Uutils and Sylvestre is the mastermind behind this and refuses to have a conversation about it even though he has nothing to do with anything going on now and Debian isn't even having the discussion about going over to Uutils.
207
As I said earlier, if you don't like Uutils, hey, totally fine.
208
Criticize it.
209
Say whatever you want about it.
210
But at least talk about things that are happening.
211
That's my bare minimum.
212
At least talk about reality.
213
With that being said, if you liked the video, go like the video, go subscribe and go tell me how much you hate Uutils and how you hate the Debian is swapping to Uutils in the comments and I don't understand what is happening.
214
Anyway, like the video, like the video, subscribe as well and if you really liked the video and you want to become one of these amazing people over here, check out the Patreon subscribe to LiberaPay linked in the description down below.
215
That's going to be it for me and Deb, I am.
✨ Vidéo recommandée
B24
51 phrases
Linux got wrecked by backdoor attack
American AccentBusiness EnglishUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
B21
282 phrases
What Stanford students actually use ChatGPT for
Business EnglishUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C13
263 phrases
Even Valve is Disappointed - Steam Machine Review
Business EnglishUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C13
170 phrases
In full: Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney's speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C11
154 phrases
Distributed Systems 1.1: Introduction
University StudentsWorking Adults
C12
234 phrases
Cursed Units 2: Curseder Units
Business EnglishUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C132 phrases
Linus Torvalds Explains What Makes Linux So Fast
Business EnglishUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C11
364 phrases
Running AI Agents in Secure Sandboxes with E2B & Docker MCP | Docker’s AI Guide to the Galaxy
Business EnglishUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C13
190 phrases
MySQL took 21 years to fix this bug
Business EnglishUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C11
78 phrases
The easy way to keep your repos tidy.
Business EnglishUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C11
137 phrases
JUST $1 For Billions of Tokens?! (DeepSeek v4 Pro)
Business EnglishUniversity StudentsWorking Adults
C12
187 phrases
How to ACTUALLY Get a DevOps Job in 2026
Business EnglishInterview EnglishUniversity Students
Vocabulaire et conseils d’expression pour cette leçon
Cette leçon d’expression orale de niveau C1 s’appuie sur la vidéo « Debian Linux GNU Coreutils Situation Is Crazy ». Les mots qui reviennent le plus souvent : uutils, Debian, core, package, utils. Cette vidéo contient 215 phrases et 3195 mots à répéter en shadowing. La partie parlée dure 19:50. Le locuteur parle à un rythme naturel d’environ 161 mots par minute, proche d’une conversation courante. Seuls 78 % des mots font partie des 3 000 mots les plus courants en anglais, le vocabulaire est donc exigeant.
Vocabulaire clé de cette vidéo
Les 15 mots les plus avancés de la vidéo, avec leur prononciation et leur sens :
| Mot | Prononciation | Sens |
|---|---|---|
| swap verbe | /ˈswɑp/ | permuter |
| funk nom | /fʌŋk/ | puanteur |
| upload verbe | /ˈʌpˌloʊd/ | téléverser, télécharger |
| contributor nom | /kənˈtɹɪb.jə.tɚ/ | contributeur |
| discourse nom | /ˈdɪs.kɔːɹs/ | discours |
| unstable adjectif | /ʌnˈsteɪ.bəl/ | instable |
| dash nom | /ˈdæʃ/ | trait, ta |
| subscribe verbe | /səbˈskɹaɪb/ | abonner, s'abonner |
| rewrite verbe | /ɹiˈɹaɪt/ | réécrire, récrire |
| unilaterally adverbe | unilatéralement | |
| upstream adjectif | /ʌpˈstɹiːm/ | à contre-courant, à contre-mont |
| meta adjectif | /ˈmɛtə/ | méta |
| unreasonable adjectif | /ʌnˈɹiːz.(ə)nə.bl̩/ | déraisonnable |
| variant nom | /ˈvæɹi.ənt/ | variante |
| bullying nom | /ˈbʊ.li.ɪŋ/ | harcèlement |
Les verbes à particule que vous entendrez
| Mot | Sens |
|---|---|
| go up verbe | monter, s'élever |
| back off verbe | reculer |
| check out verbe | mater, regarder |
| go through verbe | traverser |
| point out verbe | pointer |
Des phrases à répéter
Des phrases courtes et complètes de la vidéo, à réutiliser dans la conversation de tous les jours :
- Firstly, let's finish that email.
- I wasn't even aware of the experimental work.
- Do you want to know the source?
- Please don't cc me in the future.
- I bet you didn't know that.
La grammaire de cette vidéo
Les structures que le locuteur utilise le plus, avec les mots exacts de la vidéo :
| Structure | Dans la vidéo |
|---|---|
| Phrases conditionnelles if + proposition, will/would + verbe — une condition et son résultat | if Sylvestre Ledrue would explain |
| Present perfect have/has + participe passé — une action passée qui compte encore maintenant | have adopted · I've not seen · I've avoided |
| Voix passive be + participe passé — l’accent est mis sur ce qui arrive, pas sur qui le fait | being considered · is not discarded · could be made |
| Propositions relatives who / which + proposition — une précision sur une personne ou une chose | Experimental, which is · rudely, which is · person who made |
Prononciation à surveiller
Le locuteur utilise 34 contractions et formes réduites, comme don't, doesn't, I'm. Prononcez-les sous leur forme courte, telles que vous les entendez.
- Les sons « sh » et « zh »: dash /ˈdæʃ/, indication /ɪndɪˈkeɪʃən/, assumption /əˈsʌm(p).ʃ(ə)n/, fabrication /fæbɹɪˈkeɪʃən/, regression /ɹiːˈɡɹɛʃ.ən/
- Mots longs — placez bien l’accent: contributor /kənˈtɹɪb.jə.tɚ/, overzealous /ˌəʊvəˈzɛləs/, unreasonable /ʌnˈɹiːz.(ə)nə.bl̩/, indication /ɪndɪˈkeɪʃən/, fabrication /fæbɹɪˈkeɪʃən/
Les sons difficiles pour les francophones :
- /h/ — il se souffle, il n’est pas muet: harassment /həˈɹæsmənt/, inherit /ɪnˈhɛɹɪt/, whatsoever /ˌ(h)wʌtsoʊˈɛvɚ/
- /r/ anglais — langue recourbée, sans frotter la gorge: contributor /kənˈtɹɪb.jə.tɚ/, discourse /ˈdɪs.kɔːɹs/, subscribe /səbˈskɹaɪb/, rewrite /ɹiˈɹaɪt/, upstream /ʌpˈstɹiːm/
Comment s’entraîner avec cette vidéo
- Écoutez la vidéo en entier une fois sans parler et notez les mots que vous ne connaissez pas.
- Commencez à la vitesse 0,75×, répétez phrase par phrase, puis revenez à la vitesse normale quand cela devient facile.
- Enregistrez-vous et comparez avec l’original, en faisant attention à des mots comme swap, funk, upload.
Qu'est-ce que la technique du Shadowing ?
Le Shadowing est une technique d'apprentissage des langues fondée sur la science, développée à l'origine pour la formation des interprètes professionnels. Le principe est simple mais puissant : vous écoutez de l'anglais natif et le répétez immédiatement à voix haute — comme une ombre suivant le locuteur avec un décalage de 1 à 2 secondes. Les recherches montrent une amélioration significative de la précision de la prononciation, de l'intonation, du rythme, des liaisons, de la compréhension orale et de la fluidité.