I came to the realization that what I have been calling Linux for so many years it's actually GNU/Linux.
I did my research and it actually makes perfect sense.
Did I just red-pilled myself or am I finally going full schizo?
I came to the realization that what I have been calling Linux for so many years it's actually GNU/Linux
Gabriel Miller
Other urls found in this thread:
lwn.net
twitter.com
Brody Flores
No one gives a fuck about Gnu
Jaxson Hernandez
True but most of the "stuff" I use on my GNU/Linux machine in my everyday life are pure GNU projects.
Linux is always there in the back but gets all the credit.
Nathan James
Because it was the one thing the Gnu people couldn’t get right. To this day Hurd is still shit
Josiah Richardson
and just to list a few packages..
>bash
>grep
>wget
>system utilities (chpasswd, login, lsage, lsgroup, lsuser, mkgroup, mkuser, passwd, rmgroup, rmuser, write etc...)
>base commands (chown, chmod, cp, dd, df, dir, du, ln, ls, mkdir, mkfifo, mknod, mv, rm, cat, cksum, head, tail, md5sum, nl, od, pr, tsort, join, chroot, date, dirname, echo, env, groups, hostname, nice, nohup, printf, sleep
I am not talking about GIMP, GNOME and Gparted here, I am talking about VERY BASIC "LINUX" STUFF
John Morales
There are gnu-less alternatives to all of those utilities.
The main thing gnu contributed is the gnu c compiler and gnu c libraries, which are used to interface with the linux kernel. You can even replace these things, but any dynamically linked binary will not work unless you have glibc, or you recompile it to be statically linked, or you use a different library implementation like musl or diet libc.
When people say gnu/linux, it's mostly the gnu c library they refer to.
Nicholas Johnson
You're just a retard and probably having a stroke.
William Ramirez
False
False. Even Linus Torvalds himself could not write the Linux kernel today, NOR could he write a new kernel that would even come close to competing with Linux (or even competing with hurd today).
You think you're comparing technical prowess but in fact all you're doing is comparing project momentum.
GNU absolutely could have finished its hurd project way back in the day, but instead they chose to adopt Torvalds kernel.
Please stop perpetuating this myth that the name of an OS has anything to do with who contributed more.
When people argue that the OS is not called Linux, they don't necessarily do it because they support GNU. Because it's simply a fact that Linux is not an operating system.
You don't have to call it GNU, or GNU/Linux, but you'll still sound like a fool if you want to call it Linux.
Thomas Miller
>When people say gnu/linux, it's mostly the gnu c library they refer to.
False. What they're referring to is the fact that GNU is actually a self declared project with the specific goal of creating an OS.
Linux is not. It's that simple.
It's always funny that the people who want to call the OS "Linux" think those of us who call it "GNU/Linux" are the ones splitting hairs over who contributed what, when in fact it's just the opposite.
You're the ones who are trying to name an OS based on who you think contributed more.
Xavier Sanders
OK fair point from a "software engineer" perspective but as an average GNU/Linux user these are the actual tools that I use every other day to get shit done.
I don't care if there are non-GNU alternatives, my point is that the actual packages that come with Fedora or Debian or whatever are pure GNU and they get zero credit for it.
Matthew Robinson
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.
Jason Rivera
classic RMS
Adrian Lee
You went full mentally ill, you've been brainwashed into the linux cult. Nothing you say/write/do can be trusted.
Colton Ross
I'm terribly sorry for interjecting another moment, but what I just told you is GNU/Linux is, in fact, just Linux, or as I've just now taken to calling it, Just Linux. Linux apparently does happen to be a whole operating system unto itself and comprises a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Most computer users who run the entire Linux operating system every day already realize it. Through a peculiar turn of events, I was misled into calling the system "GNU/Linux", and until now, I was unaware that it is basically the Linux system, developed by the Linux project.
There really isn't a GNU/Linux, and I really wasn't using it; it is an extraneous misrepresentation of the system that's being used. Linux is the operating system: the entire system made useful by its included corelibs, shell utilities, and other vital system components. The kernel is already an integral part of the Linux operating system, never confined useless by itself; it functions coherently within the context of the complete Linux operating system. Linux is never used in combination with GNU accessories: the whole system is basically Linux without any GNU added, or Just Linux. All the so-called "GNU/Linux" distributions are really distributions of Linux.
Blake Flores
You redpilled yourself.
In my head it will always be the GNU OS, but faggots will keep calling it linux.
Jace Clark
>To this day Hurd is still shit
That's because they stopped seriously developing it after Linux. GNU doesn't have NIH syndrome surprisingly.
RMS's goal was to create a FOSS OS. With GNU/Linux, that goal was achieved, so there wasn't a real point in GNU/Hurd.
David Hernandez
Fun fact, the first software in the GNU Project is Emacs, and the GPL license was invented for Emacs (as an alternative to the proprietary Gosling Emacs).
Linux would never have succeeded without the GPL (or GCC). So modern GNU/Linux owes its existence to GNU Emacs, or as I like to call it, Emacs OS.
Chase Cox
Justin Robinson
mein Neger
Jordan Powell
Asher Morales
Isaiah Price
I use the Linux kernel with no GNU components. BusyBox, clang, musl, zsh, now what
Blake Myers
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.
Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ.
One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you?
(An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example.
Thanks for listening.
Thomas Hughes
Carter Brown
nosoft/linux
Xavier Phillips
I am writing this in front of my GNU/Linux Fedora machine and I really can't understand your logic.
If you take the GNU part out of Linux you take away pretty much everything that the majority of users consider as "Linux".
If you could take away Linux and replace it with an equally developed kernel, again based on Unix, would anyone really notice?
Nicholas Hernandez
Fuck Linus he didn't really invent anything, he just created a kernel based on an existing system, why make him a god?
Jaxson Gonzalez
>did I redpill myself into commie npc
No, you can't red pill into communism plus and that would require independent thought.
Nicholas Collins
I admire him by how little he loses his shit, considering how much stupidity and triggered trannies he has to deal with daily
Sebastian Cooper
Pretty much everyone who works with him agree that he's someone special, you'd think that a loosely knit band of hackers working for different companies would never get anything done but every time they disagree over something all they have to do is ask Linus to make the choice.
lwn.net
Alexander Johnson
GNU is life
Chase Thomas
Daily reminder that linux is the most used mobile OS without gnu shit
Carson Perez
Yeah and do they call it Linux? Of course not it's fucking android..
Linus didn't mind that I guess as long as his jew friends at Google are paying his salary.
Henry Jones
can you elaborate please. now i am curious.
Luis Torres
there is debian/openbsd. why wont people check it for themselfs?
Joseph Cruz
would it be totally wrong to say the following??
Linus Torvalds = Steve Jobs
Richard Stallman = Steve Wozniak
Nathan Cruz
Gnu plus Linux, you mean
Tyler Perez
wrong it's GNU slash Linux
Easton Hall
Linus still wrangles with codes daily, RMS is a washed up has been who's probably forgot how to, you got it wrong
Aaron Carter
GNU-males BTFO
Luke Green
Jobs was strictly a businessman, the other 3 are actual devs. So yes I'd say that's pretty wrong.
Matthew Johnson
>I'm using Firefox on Windows without any Apple components, now what
Joseph Bell
So are mactards using BSD libc/xnu MacOS?
Cooper Rogers
Linux is developed by thousands developers and companies allover the world. Linus work is basically approvig pull requests. According to Wikipedia he actually wrote only about 2% of Linux in the beginning.
Jackson Bailey
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as MacOS, is in fact, BSD/MacOS, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, BSD plus MacOS. MacOS is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning BSD system made useful by the BSD corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the BSD system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of BSD which is widely used today is often called “MacOS”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the BSD system, developed by the University of California Berkley or “Cal” for short. There really is a MacOS, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. MacOS is the GUI: the program in the system allows the user to perform tasks using visual models instead of more abstract models often employed in command line programs. The GUI is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. MacOS is normally used in combination with the BSD operating system: the whole system is basically BSD with MacOS added, or BSD/MacOS. All the so-called “MacOS” distributions are really distributions of BSD/MacOS.