PDA

View Full Version : Linux history question.



trunks14
May 20th, 2007, 05:17 PM
Hi, lately i got a 'Linux for dummies' book and it's very interesting, lately i've been reading about UNIX and Linux history, so, it's no news that Linux is based upon unix right?, i understand that Bell made it (UNIX) closed sourced and started licensing it, that's when Linus started his project, but, the book says he instead studied the MINIX OS and started developing the Linux Kernel from scratch.

Well, I'm only curious about the minix part, because i have that book, 1988 edition, from Andrew S. Tanenbaum. And, ultimately, Is there no Ken Thompson and Ritchie code in Linux Kernel :( ?

PatrickMay16
May 20th, 2007, 05:28 PM
Sorry to be rude but to tell the truth, you could easily find a lot of information on that by doing some google searches. And the stuff you'd find would probably be much better than anything in the replies you'd get to this post.

Not getting at you or anything, just sending you on the right track; google will certainly yield good results if you experiment with search terms.

23meg
May 20th, 2007, 05:29 PM
Linux isn't based on UNIX, but heavily influenced by it, and set out to clone certain aspects of it. So did GNU, and together they form the basis of the UNIX-like systems we use today.

matthew
May 20th, 2007, 05:37 PM
Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux

bonzodog
May 20th, 2007, 05:41 PM
I also recommend the Book "Just for Fun" by Linus Torvalds.

It explains how the linux Kernel came to be, and how Richard Stallman then added the GNU toolset to it.

Engnome
May 20th, 2007, 06:44 PM
I also recommend the Book "Just for Fun" by Linus Torvalds.

It explains how the linux Kernel came to be, and how Richard Stallman then added the GNU toolset to it.

It was the Linux kernel that was added to the GNU system, not the other way around. GNU was started years before Linus started developing his kernel. It's not part of the GNU project or the free software movement. Linux is more "open source because it's more practical that way" Linus didn't even plan to release it as free software in the beginning. However because we all call it Linux and not GNU/Linux or GNU+Linux Torvalds get's all the attention while Stallman and the GNU project and their important free software philosophy is largely ignored.

http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html

matthew
May 20th, 2007, 06:47 PM
It was the Linux kernel that was added to the GNU system, not the other way around. GNU was started years before Linus started developing his kernel. It's not part of the GNU project or the free software movement. Linux is more "open source because it's more practical that way" Linus didn't even plan to release it as free software in the beginning. However because we all call it Linux and not GNU/Linux or GNU+Linux Torvalds get's all the attention while Stallman and the GNU project and their important free software philosophy is largely ignored.

http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html
Yeah, that's true.

I'm just glad no one is bitter over it.

koenn
May 20th, 2007, 09:40 PM
I'm just glad no one is bitter over it.
Sarcasm, I presume ?
If not, try talking to rms about "Linux" i.s.o. GNU/Linux

matthew
May 20th, 2007, 09:50 PM
Sarcasm, I presume ?
If not, try talking to rms about "Linux" i.s.o. GNU/LinuxI try not to be sarcastic, but yeah, that one fits. I think the GNU guys deserve some serious credit, but whining about it only makes them look petty. Everyone using their tools is doing so according the the license, which is included with the tools, and has their names on it. The credit is there, just not the fame nor the fortune.

koenn
May 20th, 2007, 10:17 PM
I think the GNU guys deserve some serious credit, but whining about it only makes them look petty.
I can understand their frustration, though. they're the ones who made it all possible, not just with the software they made but also by providing the whole legal framework regarding copyright matters, software licensing, pattents, etc. Truely a remarkable man, that rms. Yet while Linux is hot and sexy, the GNU folks are considered zealots, weirdos and what not. Sad.

jiminycricket
May 20th, 2007, 10:24 PM
Some trivia from the Wiki article: Linux originally was under a non-commercial license, but I think at 0.40 changed to the GPL. In 1996 Linux removed the "any later version" declaration, although many files (30 percent or more) still have it, and 30% or more are simply under the GPL (any version).

I think the GNU/Linux distinction is important in the age of Google. People Google 'GNU' and find out about free software-- the original name and philosophy-- vs. open source software, which was created in 1998.

matthew
May 20th, 2007, 10:24 PM
I can understand their frustration, though. they're the once who made it all possible, not just with the software they made but also by providing the whole legal framework regarding copyright matters, software licensing, pattents, etc. Truely a remarkable man, that rms. Yet while Linux is hot and sexy, the GNU folks are considered zealots, weirdos and what not. Sad.That's a fair point.