PDA

View Full Version : GNU/Linux Article



AnLGP
June 11th, 2008, 04:32 PM
I don't know where to put this but seeing as I learned a bit about "linux" I figured here was appropriate. I'll share since I think it's interesting:


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”.

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

-me again-

I knew linux was the kernel but had no idea that GNU is basically the system. Cool! :guitar:

Joeb454
June 11th, 2008, 04:32 PM
I'm guessing that'll be the FSF talking again. Call it what you like :)

decoherence
June 11th, 2008, 04:35 PM
You may also be interested to know, then, that GNU wasn't even intended to run on Linux -- it's just happened to get adopted before the "proper" GNU kernel was released. (it's still not released, btw. check out GNU HURD)

AnLGP
June 11th, 2008, 04:39 PM
The article was on the GNU site.

I've heard of HURD but haven't tried it.

What does this mean for the linux kernel? Any speculation as to if some will run linux while others will run HURD and that will be the end of that?

Sef
June 11th, 2008, 04:39 PM
I'm guessing that'll be the FSF talking again. Call it what you like

From a technical standpoint, GNU/Linux is the correct term; however, from an informal standpoint Linux is fine.

decoherence
June 11th, 2008, 05:28 PM
What does this mean for the linux kernel? Any speculation as to if some will run linux while others will run HURD and that will be the end of that?

Not really. Maybe one day, but HURD is more of a research project at this point.

Debian has a version of its distro that runs on HURD.

ibuclaw
June 11th, 2008, 05:36 PM
Not really. Maybe one day, but HURD is more of a research project at this point.

Debian has a version of its distro that runs on HURD.

Aye, it's not up to scratch yet.

But I have my eye on the FreeBSD version of Debian more :)

But back to the topic of the OP. It doesn't really matter what you call it.
GNU and Linux don't have any form of intellectual property around who is who/who runs on who (or even who runs who/who owns who...)

So if anyone tries to persuade you forcively that you should only call it by a certain name, tell them they are wrong in every sense.
Also make a note to them mentioning that they should get their morals straight about what "FREE" really means... :)

Iain

KingTermite
June 11th, 2008, 06:08 PM
Somebody pointed me to this article (I think on this forum). While not technical, I found it enlightening from a Linux mindset point of view.

Linux is not Windows
http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

sdennie
June 11th, 2008, 06:19 PM
To quote Bullet Tooth Tony: "You can call me Susan if it makes you happy."

Sure, it's silly to refer to an OS by the name of its kernel but, on a Linux machine (yes, I called it Linux), all software is built on other software. I've not seen anyone argue that KDE should be called GNU/KDE simply because it uses libc. You should call things a name that disambiguates your meaning. If you say, "I'm running Linux", people can easily imply that you are also using GNU libs/tools.

decoherence
June 11th, 2008, 06:45 PM
The prevalent use of the improper form has helped Microsoft spread FUD. ("Linux" contains our intellectual property! ... so is that the kernel? samba? mono? oh, they won't say. convenient.) It also gives Microsoft and other linux-unfriendly outfits a single target to point their marketing departments at. Allowing them to paint "Linux" in broad strokes.

And of course, the whole reason Linux systems are so nice is that they can be tailored to specific tasks and therefore can't be painted in broad strokes. If RedHat royally screws up it gives MS's marketers ammo against ALL distros.

So what's the solution? Refer to everything by distro name alone?

No, there is no solution and this has been hashed out before. All we can do is what we're doing and deal with any problems as they come up.

For better or worse, I use The Linux Operating System! (but will still refer to it as GNU/Linux or the distro name in any kind of formal writing)

ADD: furthermore, if we called it GNU/Linux in casual conversation like the GNU people ask, I'd be getting questions like "what happened to the OLD Linux?":lolflag:

bapoumba
June 11th, 2008, 09:42 PM
Moved to "Cafe".

macogw
June 12th, 2008, 02:14 AM
Operating Systems allocate resources and talk to hardware. The kernel allocates resources and talks to hardware. The GNU tools have naught to do with those tasks. The kernel and the operating system are one, as far as I'm concerned. GNU is the toolchain.

keiichidono
June 12th, 2008, 04:00 AM
That is also what i was thinking macogw. In the Windows/Mac world it's called by the release name, but in the Linux world, since GNU is ambiguously used with everything then you call something by the kernel/distro name. People who use OpenSolaris say they use OpenSolaris because that automatically means they use GNU tools. Same for us.

AnLGP
June 16th, 2008, 04:15 AM
Just for the record I've always heard it called "linux" and I use the term "linux" myself. I just thought it was interesting, that's all.