Linux

48640 readers

1672 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

139

Ackchyually, not every Linux is a GNU Linux (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

48 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Some examples:

Android
Alpine: Alpine Linux is built around musl libc and busybox
glaucus: A simple and lightweight Linux distribution based on musl libc and toybox
Chimera (alpha stage): Chimera uses a novel combination of core tools from FreeBSD, the LLVM toolchain, and the Musl C library

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I was not talking about the technical aspects, although there is much more GNU code than Linux code in most GNU/Linux distros.

doesn't change how Linux should be named or referenced

Of course the kernel should be referred to as Linux, anything else would be inaccurate :)

[+] kadu 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

the implication that any popular piece of libre software owes anything to Stallman by the mere virtue of being libre is totally wrong.

Considering Linux: Linux was proprietary at first, until Torvalds was inspired by the free software movement to free it, even using GNU's GPL. He later said that making Linux open source was the best decision he ever made, and I'm pretty sure that this would not have happened without the popularity of GNU and the movement reaching him. Linux would've been just another small proprietary kernel. So Torvalds owes a lot to Stallman.

Also, without GNU, Linux would not have been practically usable. Only after the hard work of combining Linux with the already huge codebase of GNU could Linux be meaningfully used and become popular.

In fact, Stallman's version of "open" is deeply intertwined with the American version of what it means to be "free" politically

Well, "open source" gives you exactly the same freedoms as "free software" gives you, so proponents of "open source" can't be that far off ideologically.

it has manifested so many times that there are several open projects with the entire goal of not using GNU components, code or licenses.

The code is already there and it's usable. Not using it because you don't like the person/organization seems a bit... misguided.