Stop calling the GNU operating system "Linux“

How much GNU is actually in each distro tho? It seems like aside from some tools there isn't much.

No, Richard.

Attached: 1521588971802.jpg (806x938, 337K)

Im getting so sick of this commie kike, why cant Stallman and Noamsky go to russia and be with their own commie jew kind

Attached: 13dd7f68bcf828d5.jpg (375x366, 14K)

>I can't think of once gnu tool that's required. Even gcc is depreciated for clang.

For one, a wannabe like you needs GNU aspell to spell-check your text/grammar before posting.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, systemd plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning Lennart Poettering system made useful by PulseAudio, journald, logind, networkd, tmpfiles, timedated, udevd, and systemd-boot.
Many computer users run a modified version of the Lennart Poettering system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of systemd plus Linux which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the Lennart Poettering system, developed by Red Hat, Inc.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with systemd: the whole system is basically systemd with Linux added, or systemd plus Linux.
All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of systemd.

if this jew hates 'propreitary' software and pantents so much, why doesnt he move to a country like china that actively supports open standards for companies? why is that jew commies always have their tongue up the ass of america? is it because jews are parasites that only know how to kiss up to rich americans?

Go back to pol you piece of shit.

>MY SUPER MEGA ULTRA ALPHA HOLY SACRED VAPORWARE EXISTS!!!!!!11!!!!!1!!1

Take a good look at that image. Wikipedia disagrees with you.

Is that real? It doesn't seem to be.

>pol

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

Many users do not understand the difference between the kernel, which is Linux, and the whole system, which they also call “Linux”. The ambiguous use of the name doesn't help people understand. These users often think that Linus Torvalds developed the whole operating system in 1991, with a bit of help.

Programmers generally know that Linux is a kernel. But since they have generally heard the whole system called “Linux” as well, they often envisage a history that would justify naming the whole system after the kernel.

No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation.

Programmers generally know that Linux is a kernel. But since they have generally heard the whole system called “Linux” as well, they often envisage a history that would justify naming the whole system after the kernel. For example, many believe that once Linus Torvalds finished writing Linux, the kernel, its users looked around for other free software to go with it, and found that (for no particular reason) most everything necessary to make a Unix-like system was already available.

What they found was no accident—it was the not-quite-complete GNU system. The available free software added up to a complete system because the GNU Project had been working since 1984 to make one. In the The GNU Manifesto we set forth the goal of developing a free Unix-like system, called GNU. The Initial Announcement of the GNU Project also outlines some of the original plans for the GNU system. By the time Linux was started, GNU was almost finished.

Most free software projects have the goal of developing a particular program for a particular job. For example, Linus Torvalds set out to write a Unix-like kernel (Linux); Donald Knuth set out to write a text formatter (TeX); Bob Scheifler set out to develop a window system (the X Window System). It's natural to measure the contribution of this kind of project by specific programs that came from the project.

If we tried to measure the GNU Project's contribution in this way, what would we conclude? One CD-ROM vendor found that in their “Linux distribution”, GNU software was the largest single contingent, around 28% of the total source code, and this included some of the essential major components without which there could be no system. Linux itself was about 3%. (The proportions in 2008 are similar: in the “main” repository of gNewSense, Linux is 1.5% and GNU packages are 15%.) So if you were going to pick a name for the system based on who wrote the programs in the system, the best name would be GNU.

GNU/Linux sounds so fucking awful that I can't stand it. GNU plus Linux sounds better, especially out loud. It's just a pain to type.

Today there are many different variants of the GNU/Linux system (often called “distros”). Most of them include non-free software—their developers follow the philosophy associated with Linux rather than that of GNU. But there are also completely free GNU/Linux distros. The FSF supports computer facilities for gNewSense.

Making a free GNU/Linux distribution is not just a matter of eliminating various non-free programs. Nowadays, the usual version of Linux contains non-free programs too. These programs are intended to be loaded into I/O devices when the system starts, and they are included, as long series of numbers, in the "source code" of Linux. Thus, maintaining free GNU/Linux distributions now entails maintaining a free version of Linux too.

Whether you use GNU/Linux or not, please don't confuse the public by using the name “Linux” ambiguously. Linux is the kernel, one of the essential major components of the system. The system as a whole is basically the GNU system, with Linux added. When you're talking about this combination, please call it “GNU/Linux”.

>Linus Torvalds set out to write a Unix-like kernel (Linux); Donald Knuth set out to write a text formatter (TeX); Bob Scheifler set out to develop a window system (the X Window System).
As you already said earlier in the post, Linus didn't start Linux as a part of the GNU project. It was a separate project. They just got combined because they complete each other. Losing the name "Linux" totally would be equally as wrong as losing "GNU" totally, and people already picked the second option in that case. The widespread nickname is now Linux and it has been for years and years. Only decent alternative for the name "Linux" is "GNU plus Linux" or "Linux plus GNU".

That doesn't contradict anything I said

>is it because americans are parasites that only know how to kiss up to rich jews?
Ftfy

Stallmeme got told!

>commie
opinion discarded

It's fake. The pasta is from Jow Forums. Stallman would never have a Google+ account.

Found the original.

Attached: 1473260951144.jpg (1920x1920, 781K)

>Jew commies
>Communists hate Jews
>Jews, supposedly, control banks, the entertainment industry, all corporations and the government; which would make them neoliberal technocrats
Jow Forums. Not even once.

I can do that once you're done with HURD.

They're both meme accounts you dunce

>your image just gave me cancer
totally meme post and not stallman

no

GNUx

Stop calling the .NET operating system "WIndows".

Underrated desu

the Linux project has much more talent, time, and effort in developing and maintaining. GNU barely has anyone working on it.

>makes a cuckold license where everyone can copy anyone and use any name they want
>cries when his programs are copy pasted into distros that are then called by different names

Attached: 15m5ms.jpg (960x690, 81K)