- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Why I refuse to call it GNU/Linux
|
|
|
Comments (53)
Linux is an OS kernel blah blah blah
31 earlier comments in the full thread.
Is there a linux system that doesn't use the GNU tools?
If not then it seems redundant to call it GNU/Linux. Since if they all use the GNU tools then if you get a linux systems then you get the GNU tools, and there is no need to differentiate from a non-GNU Linux.
If not then it seems redundant to call it GNU/Linux. Since if they all use the GNU tools then if you get a linux systems then you get the GNU tools, and there is no need to differentiate from a non-GNU Linux.
> Is there a linux system that doesn't use the GNU tools?
Not that I know of. If anyone does know of one, I'll sure they'll let us know.
Not that I know of. If anyone does know of one, I'll sure they'll let us know.
Depends, some base installs use busybox and then the end user adds in the GNU components as needed. Some bits of the GNU tools may be added to flesh out what busybox doesn't cover. Debian I know ships busybox in its base install. You can then start looking hard for GNU stuff in embedded products, it is harder to find it there than not. According to a few of the posts I have read elsewhere in relation/retaliation to the article it seems that there are perhaps GNU free distro's, although none were named and I haven't searched for any corroboration.
> Is there a linux system that doesn't use the GNU tools?
Gentoo/FreeBSD comes close I think, except it doesn't have the Linux kernel and it does have gcc, but for the rest it's intended to be the same as Gentoo/Linux (all a bit odd, I admit).
Gentoo/FreeBSD comes close I think, except it doesn't have the Linux kernel and it does have gcc, but for the rest it's intended to be the same as Gentoo/Linux (all a bit odd, I admit).
Quoting:What’s in a name? that which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet;
I think Dino said it best as he quoted Shakespeare above.
On the other hand, Linux is simple, short, a good sounding easy to say and not like many other FOSS names we hear.
But if you insist on changing it, how about Gnunix? I bet this will give Linus a fit.
>But if you insist on changing it, how about Gnunix? I bet this will give Linus a fit.
And, let's face it: Once a name is in popular use, it's very hard to change.
Microsoft tried for years to get people to call its OS Windows. It has now given up, and is trying Vista.
And yet, few people call it that, preferring the ever-popular "F---ing piece of s--- " as in "that (popular name for Windows) has hosed up my report again".
And, let's face it: Once a name is in popular use, it's very hard to change.
Microsoft tried for years to get people to call its OS Windows. It has now given up, and is trying Vista.
And yet, few people call it that, preferring the ever-popular "F---ing piece of s--- " as in "that (popular name for Windows) has hosed up my report again".
> how about Gnunix?
Oh blast it all, I won't know if I'm running Debian/Hurd, Debian/OpenSolaris, Debian/Linux or Debian/BSD at that point, since Gnunix fits all of them.
Oh blast it all, I won't know if I'm running Debian/Hurd, Debian/OpenSolaris, Debian/Linux or Debian/BSD at that point, since Gnunix fits all of them.
Quoting:Oh blast it all, I won't know if I'm running Debian/Hurd...
Now Bob, do you really need to know? Aren't they all about the same!
Do you really believe Hurd is going to materialize as usable OS? What do you know that we don't?
OpenSolaris is not going to survive as an alternative to the Linux we have now. In my opinion that is.
Gnunix would be equivalent to Gnu+Linux and each will add their brand name to it. ex. Debian Gnunix, Ubuntu Gnunix, PCLOS Gnunix, etc... ( I really think that every brand/distro should include Linux to its name).
BSD: Let's leave this alone since it doesn't fit in the GPL group.
After all, it was just an on the fly suggestion. :)
> Now Bob, do you really need to know? Aren't they all about the same!
You're right, I'll run Windows. :^)
You're right, I'll run Windows. :^)
> You're right, I'll run Windows.
Seriously, what do we call a Windows system with Cygwin installed? Gnudows?
Seriously, what do we call a Windows system with Cygwin installed? Gnudows?
Linux is.... a state of mind. It....cannot be....labeled, or....pigeonholed. Linux is...a state of being; a....Oneness....with the Many.
Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Quoting:Seriously, what do we call a Windows system with Cygwin installed? Gnudows?
Seriously! You are close but not quite right. It would be called GnuDOS. :)
That will make RMS happy.
This may seem an academic argument, but when there were rumours of KDE porting to run on the Windows kernel, it didn't seem all that far fetched.
Don't ask me _why_, it wasn't me who thought of it.
Don't ask me _why_, it wasn't me who thought of it.
The key to Firefox, OpenOffice and the GIMP's success is that they are available on multiple platforms. KDE is such a rich collection of applications, as well as a desktop environment that if it did run over Windows, it would a) make another giant example of free, open-source software wildly popular and b) give its users that much more reason to leave Windows and Mac OS behind for Linux or BSD.
I've heard that you can, or will be able to run KDE over Mac OS X, too.
I've heard that you can, or will be able to run KDE over Mac OS X, too.
Microsoft's Services For Unix (formerly Interix, formerly OpenNT) also shipped with many GNU tools.
So you could make Windows NT into Windows gNuT with product completely sold by MS! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interix
So you could make Windows NT into Windows gNuT with product completely sold by MS! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interix
Quoting:if it did run over Windows ... I've heard that you can, or will be able to run KDE over Mac OS X, too.
I believe KDE 4 will be available on Windows. See these links
http://www.kdelibs.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
http://qtwin.sourceforge.net/qt3-win32/index.php
I also believe that Qt 4.x is available for Windows under the GPL.
Quoting:So you could make Windows NT into Windows gNuT with product completely sold by MS!
Purchased by MS to be contained or/and destroyed, what else!
Quoting:KDE is such a rich collection of applications, as well as a desktop environment that if it did run over Windows,
...I could run something usable on my Windows computer at work!
Doesn't the current version already sorta work in Cygwin?
Linux doesn't refer to the kernel (!!!)
Linux _is_ an OS kernel. Maybe it is 'useless' without GNU. Therefore, it may be it should be called GNU/Linux.
However, who cares? Though I may, most don't. When referring to 'Linux', 90% of the people who use this term refer to the whole ecosystem: UNIX roots, Linux kernel, GPLv2/3 license, open source way of developing, the idea of distributions, KDE/Gnome (though both run on *BSD fine) and so on. It would be better to call that ecosystem FLOSS (The "L" helps defending against the Free debate). Nonetheless, if I tell people I use Linux, they say: "Oh, yeah, I heard about that. It's the gratis software alternative for Microsoft, eh? A cousin of someone I know is into it, I heard!", and they understand the alternative OS I'm using, even if they don't understand 'free' (where the L comes in) or the difference with BSD.
When I tell people I use GNU/Linux, they glaze at me. GNU/Linux, when said quickly, sounds to them like a magnetron (Moulinex) or so.
So even if it isn't right, language is living and changing. You can't say millions of people who use the term 'Linux' when referring to the whole ecosystem are wrong, if 80% of the people understand what they're meaning (and 1% understands, but doesn't want to).
That means, apart from the discussion on the principle, there's the millions who use, change and make language. Yes, those same who made 'to Google' a verb. Language is changing - also because it is used in the wrong way, and there's no way to stop it. It's the <10% of the people that invents new words, and it's the >90% that uses it and give a real-world everyday meaning to them, even though the latter may differ from the first.
However, who cares? Though I may, most don't. When referring to 'Linux', 90% of the people who use this term refer to the whole ecosystem: UNIX roots, Linux kernel, GPLv2/3 license, open source way of developing, the idea of distributions, KDE/Gnome (though both run on *BSD fine) and so on. It would be better to call that ecosystem FLOSS (The "L" helps defending against the Free debate). Nonetheless, if I tell people I use Linux, they say: "Oh, yeah, I heard about that. It's the gratis software alternative for Microsoft, eh? A cousin of someone I know is into it, I heard!", and they understand the alternative OS I'm using, even if they don't understand 'free' (where the L comes in) or the difference with BSD.
When I tell people I use GNU/Linux, they glaze at me. GNU/Linux, when said quickly, sounds to them like a magnetron (Moulinex) or so.
So even if it isn't right, language is living and changing. You can't say millions of people who use the term 'Linux' when referring to the whole ecosystem are wrong, if 80% of the people understand what they're meaning (and 1% understands, but doesn't want to).
That means, apart from the discussion on the principle, there's the millions who use, change and make language. Yes, those same who made 'to Google' a verb. Language is changing - also because it is used in the wrong way, and there's no way to stop it. It's the <10% of the people that invents new words, and it's the >90% that uses it and give a real-world everyday meaning to them, even though the latter may differ from the first.
When speaking I usually use "Linux". When writing I usually follow whatever the distro's standard is. So, Red Hat Linux and Debian GNU/Linux.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
In your opinion, yes. They may not agree.
> If something is inherently incorrect, the length of time that people perpetuate misinformation is irrelevant.
If something is incorrect, yes. You've stated an opinion that it is. There's a famous quotation about opinions which seems applicable but doesn't bear repeating.
The only factual detail involved in this matter are that to be called a Linux system it should be running the Linux kernel, and to be called a Gnu system it should be running the Gnu utilities. Which takes priority in naming, or whether both should be used, is entirely a matter of personal opinion.
I use the term Linux because it's better recognized, it's easier to say, I started calling it that before RMS started his crusade, and I'm lazy. I should also note that the distribution I use is officially named Slackware Linux.