GNU is holding Linux back

>implying proprietary is the alternative to the GPL
>being this brainwashed by the FSF

You want Linux without Gahnoo?
Use Android for a week and youll venerate RMS as a demigod.

what's an UNUX?

simple don't use the GNU tool set.

board's full of tards today

>reverse engineer GNU
>very carefully rewrite every part of the source "in your own words" so that not a single file in the overall system can be called a GNU-authored file, nor can anyone claim you're redistributing or relicensing GNU software
>release the software as something like "UNG," short for "UNG's Not GNU"
>license it as proprietary, everyone who installs or redistributes it must pay you royalties, etc
>incorporate linux into it
>you now have a GNU/Linux not held back by GNU

this
the beautiful thing about oss is you have a choice. nobody's stopping you from making your own version of tools gnu provide and use the license that you like.

I really wish that the BSDs didn't have garbage hardware compatibility or slower performance than Linux.

How would this improve linucks in anyway?
I guess being Jewish it may benefit your wallet.

>UNG's not GNU
dam son!

Attached: 1460407363376.jpg (354x313, 28K)

>gnu/linux
>like 3% market share at most
>non-gnu linux(like android)
>over 50% market share
Really makes you think....

Holding Linux back from what, exactly? What wonderful things are you proposing would happen if it weren't for GNU?

Where would Linux be without essential software like the GNU Desktop environment (gnome ) or GNU image manipulator ?

>hurr i'm not supporting proprietary developers by using the MIT license
get a grip

>without GNU Desktop environment
gnome is absolute cancer. they managed to limit the funcionality to toddler levels and make it sluggish and bloated at the same time

Does it even matter? Shit works

>gnome
is this bait

>implying "i'm not supporting proprietary developers by using the MIT license" merits a "hurr"
>implying it is not true
>implying using the MIT license supports proprietary developers
>being this brainwashed by the FSF

Just use Unix.

Linux is a Unix.

>no package manager

Attached: oh boh muhmroh .png (366x275, 103K)

>denial denial denial
commie

Only two distros are UNIX certified, the rest are just members of the *nix family

>"commie"
>t. brainwashed by the FSF
oh the irony

Attached: >it wasnta shitpost.png (577x361, 116K)

Gnu is Not Unix plus Linux is not a Unix.

Unix means things like implementing POSIX standards, not paying the Open Group money for a certificate. The "certification" is less than meaningless.

>any opinions with the family guy memes
This is holding back the whole universe I bet.

The Open Group owns UNIX and gets to deem what it means whether you like it or not

Gnome is for retards that by all rights are to dumb for a unix based system user, use a real wm like twm or fvwm. Anything more just gets in the way.

>lol FSF = commie
>btw let me just do all this work for proprietary companies for free :^)
commie and cuck

Meanwhile, the rest of the world, modulo some retards like you, will continue to not pay attention to them. Much like the world pronounces "GIF" with a hard G despite the ramblings of the format's creator.

>Comparing PCs to Embedded

>smartphone
>embedded
kek, right

How else I should name device with various sensors and devices glued together without any discovery interface so device tree files needs to be there, or even better, everything hardware is hardcoded into kernel?

By definition an embedded system fulfills a single function within a larger system. It doesn't leave the user with a choice of what the computer actually does other than a pre-defined set of tasks. A smartphone has enough I/O methods to qualify as a general purpose computer.

The AGPL is the only way to protect your freedom from proprietary developers who want to steal your code. Anything else is cuck status.

When a Googler sees code with the AGPL, they wet themselves and start crying. They can't steal this code, they are finally beaten.

Fair point, I mistook an embedded system with just a clusterfuck of a hardware

Literally just use BSD, Microsoft. You don't even have to worry about breaking their license.

Don't be faggots.
Gpl is the only good thing that the kike called stallman came up.

Reminder that fagOS is only certified up to POZIX 03 which is an ancient useless deprecated standard from 1998, and the only reason it still exists at all is a tiny handful of government contracts from last century that were never updated.

Attached: 1524823235265.png (952x655, 57K)

This.
GPL is not bad. Busybox is much less bloated than GNUtils, and probably most other utils for that matter, but is licenced copyleft as well.
>Google
Speaking of them, is it any coincidence that their new Fuchsia OS is licensed (((permissively)))?

bruh, only Solaris has the newest cert, and 03 is considered full compliance anyway. Did you even read your own image?

>t. mactoddler

get toddled upon, winbabby

Reminder that Eunuchs is a dead meme and an ancient useless deprecated standard from the 80's.
The entire point of standards is having everyone on the same page. No one is on the same page as TheCuckGroup except Applel.

THE standard is now Linux.

Attached: 1515476425970.png (800x480, 19K)

I'm not saying macOS is good. It certainly is not up to the standard of the other *nixes, but at the same time, your point you were trying to make is not backed up by the facts.

Install EulerOS.

>>btw let me just do all this work for proprietary companies for free :^)
>implying work done with the MIT license is work done for proprietary companies for free
>being this brainwashed by the FSF

Attached: kek.png (1280x2182, 523K)

>>Google
>Speaking of them, is it any coincidence that their new Fuchsia OS is licensed (((permissively)))?
You'd be hard pressed to find any large company that licenses with freedom respecting licenses. The ones that do use it as a weapon, like Mongo.

> oh you don't like these filthy commie licenses, mr capitalist? Well don't you worry, we have just the license for you! Only 5million shekels and you can enjoy our free software!

Any for profit company large enough to have lawyers have to use permissive licenses to avoid spooking the companies they want to use the software.

thistbhfam

It is though. You are giving away your code without any protections to prevent it from being squirreled away. Look at what happened with minix. It's now the most used operating system in the world, on account of it running embedded in Intel hardware. But because of the (((BSD License))), it's community has not seen any of the work that Intel put into it.

GNU itself is much larger a project than a single operating system. It includes things like libre hardware and firmware, open documentation and copyleft, among other stuff.
Regarding the operating system development, GNU (along with nixOS) are the only projects pushing systems research. GUIXSD, the GNU system, is at the forefront of such ideas as purely functional package and system managemen, making it possible to reproduce any system configuration by simply applying a configuration file. They have their own init systems and all.
GNU is out there solving real problems both in computing and real world and doing research, while linux is collecting support for research projects from other unices and systems such as ZFS from Solaris or 9p from Plan 9. It's just a kernel.
The GNU userland most linux users get to know might be small, but that's not all that GNU is.

Not to mention that th GNU/Linux system is obviously superior to the BSDs. The only differences between these were initially the license, so it's obvious the GPL has been benefitical to all equally. Currently I'm just waiting for Hammer2 and pledge() to get assimilated into the GNU/Linux system. The BSD license has contributed nothing but rot to their home systems.

>"without any protections"
>aka "no protections by law means no protections at all"
>aka "it should be the government's job to protect my intellectual property from uses i don't approve of"
>aka "the government should have a hand in the market"
>being this much of a communist
>being this brainwashed by the FSF

Attached: 5da.jpg (1000x1002, 170K)

> 3% market share
More like 60% of servers, maybe as much on smart appliances, and probably 80%+ of the internet's traffic / near 100% of ebanking and stock markets and air traffic control and other shit that matters.

Uh, the default CURRENTLY is an almost all encompassing protection by the government and the GPL lessens it to virtually give all rights to anyone who gets their hand on the software legally.

The deal is that as payment for your usage of the software and any patents it may affect, you grant the same rights equally for your modifications.

This is something a lot of companies agreed on even before the GPL for even non software IP, and actually the GPL is also convenient for corporate open sauce to many companies, else they wouldn't have joined in. That a few control freak companies with a controllable customer base don't like it would be besides the point.

>durrr protection of property rights bad, government-sanctioned property redistribution good
>duuurrr i'm not a commie

Attached: the thick fucking ass .jpg (2299x1644, 103K)

If you dislike the government so much then just hire your private army to overthrow the government and enforce your software licenses after you created your ancap utopia. And if you aren't willing to do that and you're not okay with the government enforcing your license either then why license your code at all?

Fuck off Microsoft

Attached: 1466298318925.png (1853x1000, 1.29M)

Lmao you're just one autist, what are you going to do against the might of Google, Apple and MS to protect your code? If you want to live in your magic ancap utopia you better give up all your rights first, slave.

What, this is a capitalist deal of the "in kind" / "license pool" sort.

Communist would be if the dictatorial unelected leader says you have to do x for the state's planned economy by time z or you'll see the gulag/firing squad.

>>durrr protection of property rights bad, government-sanctioned property redistribution good
Are you just making shit up at this point? Software licensing is literally about the protection of property rights.

Dammit you got me, I can't think of an intelligent rebuttal to this and/or I'm tired of playing the game.
I'm actually very much in favor of the GPL and what it stands for. I still license my code as MIT, though, to avoid scrutiny by influential people who might actually think the way I was pretending to. Particularly because I would like a job one day and that way of thinking seems particularly likely to be touted by the corporations I would be happiest to be hired by

the reason for the number of drivers in the Linux kernel is because of the GPL you chucklefuck

explan

they can't use proprietary drivers because they can't distribute them under a gpl license therefore they must write drivers from scratch

>Today

Why would you want to use a proprietary driver? Do you want to get spied on that badly?

Proprietary licenses are what makes software functional.

Functional at attacking freedoms isn't something you should desire.

GPL combined with the lack of a stable ABI in the Linux kernel heavily encourage OEMs to upstream their drivers.

there are loopholes however and some opt for releasing binary modules that are compatible with only one version/branch. many Android OEMs do this.

GNU isn't holding Linux back
It's holding Linux hostage

If the kernel had a stable interface for drivers, Android would not be such a shithole. No wonder Google is building Fuscia.

Utter crap. There is nothing to stop a non-gnu Linux from taking over, like Android has. Gnu/Linux is just better than the alternatives for most tasks.

Treble is already doing this you impossible shitter. Fuchsia is a senior eng retention project.

>Garbage Nigger Utilities

Attached: 1468740349691.jpg (664x520, 44K)

You don't think it's a stopgap solution? Fuscia is some time away from being production ready, and they've got a problem right now.

I hope that with the recent DARPA funding hardware will become more open before Google gets rid of GPL. The main reason for closed drivers is OEMs trying to keep their IP safe.

>inb4 GNU GPL4

In reality, Linux is holding GNU back.
If not Linus with his toy-OS, we'd already use GNU/Hurd

t. Chin Chong

>GPL bad
>MIT gud
MIT is absolute trash my dude, this licence is like working for free and then sucking your dick while someone is cumming inside your anus.

Just use lowercase letters when not talking about the standard, it's a pretty commonly accepted compromise. "UNIX" = standard, "Unix" = OS family

This

I can't tell if you did it on purpose or not, but that's literally the GNU origin story reversed.
GNU is just a Unix clone. Bell labs did all the design work, GNU just reimplimented it and relicensed it.
It's insane that they ever got away with this.

>pledge() to get assimilated into the GNU/Linux
pledge() doesn't make much sense under GNU/linux as on BSD for the same reason seccomp doesn't work as well. On GNU/Linux, different people work on the userland and the kernel side, mostly cooperating on common API but evolving slowly (see articles about glibc on lklm). I would make the point here but this article is better at it

lwn.net/Articles/738694/

When you literally have a product and a certifiable standard using the same name only differentiated by letter case, it's pretty important.
It's not the same as pronunciation, it's a whole different word.
"gif" and "jiff" both mean the same thing but sound different.
"Unix" and "UNIX" sound the same but are 2 completely different things.

The whole industry respects this, modulo you.

>doing the mental gimnastics

>Garbage Nigger Utilities
kek, I will save that for later

You need a lesson on Copyright.

Copyright only protects the expression of the idea, not the idea itself. Copying the idea of a function taking 2 strings and outputting the concatenating of them is permissible under all Copyright laws I'm aware of. Copying their expression of the idea wouldn't be, but rms specifically didn't do that, he stuck to copying the fundamental idea

Why do GPL advocates complain about people making money off of someone's code when the GPL permits the same exact thing in every version?

I can take a GPL project and sell the binaries or use it in a service and make 0 contributions upstream.
People have been doing this forever, it's one of the appealing points of the license for businesses.

Half the appliances in my house use unmodified GPL software. Should I make the same assumptions that GPL users make for BSD/MIT/ISC license vendors and say Samsung pays nothing to the FSF and is basically "stealing" the code.

Like what argument are you people even trying to make. As if writing GPL software isn't working for free. It's been like this since day 0.

If you're going to have license wars at least focus on the differences between them.

If this is true, then why isnt BSD killing linux?