You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument.
Can confirm it's a shitty metric. I once saved the company I was working at few millions by changing one line of code. And it took 3 days to find it. And it was only 3 characters changed.
That's the curse and blessing of our profession: efficiency of work is almost impossible to measure once you go beyond very simple code.
You can feel like a hero for changing three characters and finally fixing that nasty, or you can feel like an absolute disgrace for needing days to find such a simple fix. Your manager employs the same duality of judgement
Then this:
:(){ :|:& };:is most important code in existence.What you refer to as Linux, is actually called Forkbomb/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calli-
[Process Killed]
Permanently Deleted
No, he doesn't. He suggests that there are Linux systems with no GNU code, like one I'm replying from, and whether "no" meant "no SLOC" or "no instructions spent executing" or "no packages" absolutely doesn't matter.
Ubuntu: "Linux"
Fedora: "Linux"
Arch: "Linux"
Gentoo: "Linux"
Slackware: "Linux"
Debian: "Free Operating System"There's more truth to that than most people realize: Linux is only one kernel option in Debian:
Been running a Linux based os for coming up on two years. I still definitely do not care about this.
Been running a Linux based os for coming up on twenty years. I still definitely do not care about this.
But the compiler is GNU!
If you compile windows with GCC is it gnu/windows?
So, how's Hurd doing these days? If they want their own operating system, maybe they should release version 1.0 of their kernel.
There are distros without GNU, like alpine.
Without glibc and coreutils (by default), not without gnu.
I honestly never cared about this, it's the first time I write something about that, but any Linux-based OS is made of countless different software. What limits the number of names to two? Why can't I call my OS OpenVPN/Gnu/Linux, then why not Wayland/OpenVPN/Gnu/Linux? That would be crazy. A single recognizable name is what makes it.
Furthermore by definition an operating system is an interface between userspace applications to the hardware, hence the operating system should be just Linux.
Not shitting on GNU at all, but this push for calling the OS Gnu/Linux seems futile
Furthermore by definition an operating system is an interface between userspace applications to the hardware, hence the operating system should be just Linux.
It gets more complicated with microkernels, though because you literally can't run anything without some important processes running in userspace.
That's a good point, thank you for your time
SystemD/Linux
Permanently Deleted
Implementation is the actual code with the logic that does the thing you want it do, as opposed to the command, which is how you tell the system what it should do.
The command can be the same on multiple OSs, but the implementation can be different.
In case of Linux and the coreutils (which are the basic programs you need beside the kernel to make a functioning system, stuff like mkdir) the most common implementation of all the coreutils is the one made by GNU. Stallmann did a lot of work on that so he wants credit for making a big part of the OS.
The same program (
echo) implemented in different operating systems (and the GNU version).
Well, no surprise they have more lines of code. And that's even if you disregard printing help.
That's how they get more lines of code.
This is why Windows users don’t switch.
I used Linux for many years, I still run it for my personal projects. I'm sure it's not everyone but damn the community is toxic as hell to newbies. If something doesn't work it's your fault. Don't know what flatpak is? You're an idiot. How do I use X? Don't use X it sucks but also I won't provide alternatives. Linux just works now open up terminal and type these flags to mount your external drive correctly so other programs can see it.
I love the power and customization but it's a confusing world at times with unhelpful people.
I mean X does suck. Unfortunately, it's still the better choice sometimes. At least Wayland is clearly better than the other X.
This has been pretty much my experience with every time I've gotten the "Linux" itch...
It's so bad that most of the time googling doesn't help because the top twenty results are just someone else getting shit on for asking the same question.
Some guy got mad at me for referring to linux as GNU/Linux in a post clearly making fun of him for being a huge shit head to someone earnestly trying to do something on Linux and failing. Never address any of the criticisms, just called me an idiot and a liar. SOME linux users are their own worst enemy if they want wider adoption.
holds up linux os without gnu software WHATS THIS THEN HUH?!
Gnun't/Linux
GNL (GNU isn't Linux) / Linux
busybox, musl and llvm enter the room
Take a look at Alpine, Void, and (most importantly) Chimera Linux.
The shortest proper name is GNU.
Inb4 Alpine, which is just called "Linux" internally.
People use terrible words in CS and engineering in general. Doesn't mean we don't challenge them.
I mean, GNU wants to be called an operating system but it can't talk to hardware.
And hardware can't talk to it. Has it ever occurred to you that there's more at stake here? That companies feel the need to lock away hardware in order to drive their profit line.
At least GNU has something interesting to say about computer science. And for what it's worth, it's telling to know that you woild rather disparage GNU rather than the purposeful decisions made by executives and manufactuers to render both hardware and software undocumented and subjugating.
But no! That's "unfixable" and we need to learn how to "deal with it." God forbid anyone makes a ruckus about it. Freedom for me but not for thee in this fast paced economy.
You picked the status quo and are now complaining that people reject the status quo.
Alpine Linux: what’s up, guys?
throws chair "Fine, it's just GNU then!"
Does GNU userspace even make the top-3 Linux userspaces?
So GNU I’d just bloat /s
Just say linux, the 'gnu + ' is a given
I'd like to interject for a moment........ STALLMAN, Richard
More like GN vs Linus
Permanently Deleted
So much corporate bootlicking in this thread. People don't seem to know what GNU and Linux actually stand for and the importance of the free software movement, all they see is a fancy Windows alternative where they can run the same stupid proprietary programs and in the end contribute to the loss of software freedom just as much as a useless Microsoft consumer. People here are even openly hostile to GNU despite it being possibly the most important component in ensuring that free software remains free. I feel like our operating systems are being hijacked by little children with no responsibility for which GNU/Linux only serves mundane, corporately induced needs, and they don't see the political and idealistic dimension at all.
PostmarketOS anyone?
It's just GNU 🤷
Lol gnome on X11
Permanently Deleted
