Linked by the_randymon on Mon 7th Jan 2013 18:56 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes The mostly-morubund Hurd project is well known for what it's not: the kernel at the heart of the GNU/Linux system. But there's a long and interesting story about what it could have been, too. From Linux User magazine: "The design of the Hurd was an attempt to embody the spirit and promise of the free software movement in code." Those are mighty ambitions, and this story is as much about competing visions as competing kernels. Says Thomas Bushnell: "My first choice was to take the BSD 4.4-Lite release and make a kernel. I knew the code, I knew how to do it. It is now perfectly obvious to me that this would have succeeded splendidly and the world would be a very different place today." This is a well-written and fascinating read.
Thread beginning with comment 547711
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Re:
by kurkosdr on Mon 7th Jan 2013 21:40 UTC
kurkosdr
Member since:
2011-04-11

Can we stop parroting the "GNU/Linux" propaganda? Linux was a fully functional OS before it took any GNU code. It just replaced some of it's code with GNU code to become POSIX compliant and generally better. The FSF's propaganda that says Linux "started as a kernel"/"is just a kernel" is incorrect. It started as an OS. Oh, I see, just because only the kernel part of the original codebase survived, the FSF has the right to rename the project from "foo" to "GNU/foo". Where is the relevant clause in the GPL that defines something like this? Oh yeah it doesn't exist. Can you imagine that happening on other projects? If you incorporate too much code from GNU upstream, we renane your project! For people that started a whole fight about the "give credit" clause in BSD, the FSF are very annoying with their demand to appropriate Linux to themselves.

Unfortunatetly, this won't go away anytime soon. The FSF zealots have more time in their hands that anyone else, and heaven forbid any opinion non-compliant to the FSF propaganda be heard. Woe onto anyone that says "open/closed source" instead of "free/nonfree software". Never mind that open source is a legally protected trademark and has a robust definition while "free software"... not. But i guess that will explain the comments down below.

Oh, and Android doesn't contain "Linux", it contains the kernel part of Linux.

Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; el-gr; LG-P990 Build/GRJ23) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1 MMS/LG-Android-MMS-V1.0/1.2

Reply Score: 2

RE: Re:
by DrJohnnyFever on Mon 7th Jan 2013 22:15 in reply to "Re:"
DrJohnnyFever Member since:
2012-03-07

Linux is just a kernel. All the utilities and commands you run on your Linux machine are GNU. Linux is just a kernel image. Thats it.

I don't like the GNU/Linux naming crap any more than you do, but credit where its due, the GNU project is a massive part of any linux system. Linux didn't just take parts of it, most of the system is GNU.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Re:
by Delgarde on Mon 7th Jan 2013 22:28 in reply to "RE: Re:"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

All the utilities and commands you run on your Linux machine are GNU.


No, *some of* the utilities and commands you run on your Linux machine are GNU. Important ones, to be sure - glibc, coreutils, sed, etc - but GNU don't get *all* the credit. None of the init daemons are GNU, nor things like util-linux, most of the networking tools, process-management, etc..

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE[2]: Re:
by Chris_G on Tue 8th Jan 2013 00:27 in reply to "RE: Re:"
Chris_G Member since:
2012-10-25

A name is not the credits at the end of a movie. It's just a convenient way of referring to something. GNU/Linux is a cumbersome, awkward (and therefore bad) name. Linux is fine. And it's more commonly used anyway.

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE: Re:
by Valhalla on Mon 7th Jan 2013 22:25 in reply to "Re:"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

Oh, and Android doesn't contain "Linux", it contains the kernel part of Linux.

Whatever Linux was at it's infancy, Linux today is a kernel, which is a component of what we call an operating system. A very fundamental component, but a component nonetheless.

So:

Android is an operating system running a Linux kernel
Ubuntu is an operating system running a Linux kernel
Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is an operating system running a FreeBSD kernel
Darwin is an operating system running a XNU kernel
Windows is an operating system running a NT kernel.

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE: Re:
by Laurence on Tue 8th Jan 2013 00:35 in reply to "Re:"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Can we stop parroting the "GNU/Linux" propaganda? Linux was a fully functional OS before it took any GNU code. It just replaced some of it's code with GNU code to become POSIX compliant and generally better. The FSF's propaganda that says Linux "started as a kernel"/"is just a kernel" is incorrect. It started as an OS. Oh, I see, just because only the kernel part of the original codebase survived, the FSF has the right to rename the project from "foo" to "GNU/foo". Where is the relevant clause in the GPL that defines something like this? Oh yeah it doesn't exist. Can you imagine that happening on other projects? If you incorporate too much code from GNU upstream, we renane your project! For people that started a whole fight about the "give credit" clause in BSD, the FSF are very annoying with their demand to appropriate Linux to themselves.

Unfortunatetly, this won't go away anytime soon. The FSF zealots have more time in their hands that anyone else, and heaven forbid any opinion non-compliant to the FSF propaganda be heard. Woe onto anyone that says "open/closed source" instead of "free/nonfree software". Never mind that open source is a legally protected trademark and has a robust definition while "free software"... not. But i guess that will explain the comments down below.

Oh, and Android doesn't contain "Linux", it contains the kernel part of Linux.Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; el-gr; LG-P990 Build/GRJ23) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1 MMS/LG-Android-MMS-V1.0/1.2

Ironically your rant about Android has hit upon the very reason why many people do called desktop distros as GNU/Linux. Because you can then have Android/Linux, GNU/Hurd and so on. It makes the distinction across the different forks easier to describe concisely.

Plus, you're overstating just how much of complete OS the early versions of Linux was. Even the earliest of versions was developed on Minix and compiled used GNU C Compiler. Linux was never anything significantly more than a kernel (not even the terminal emulator project that gave birth to Linux). Even before the renaming of Linux (originally Linus called it something like Freknix - I'm so glad the FTP host had better ideas!), Linus's kernel and development was heavily dependant on the user land from other POSIX OSs. So I think it's somewhat overstating to argue that Linux had a complete user land before RMS (reluctantly) adopted the kernel.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: Re:
by ssokolow on Tue 8th Jan 2013 12:20 in reply to "RE: Re:"
ssokolow Member since:
2010-01-21

Ironically your rant about Android has hit upon the very reason why many people do called desktop distros as GNU/Linux. Because you can then have Android/Linux, GNU/Hurd and so on. It makes the distinction across the different forks easier to describe concisely.


Except that's not the distinction at all.

X11/Linux would be more accurate and, even IF you're running console apps that are more constrained by their GNU-isms than their dependency on something like X11, that's still glibc/Linux, not GNU/Linux.

"GNU/Linux" came about because Stallman draws the line between "operating system" and "extras" at the bare minimum you need to run a terminal with a Bourne-family shell and emacs... which means that X11 (which is the single biggest component by KLOCs on a "Linux" system) is an "extra" (and, therefore, it's not "X11/GNU/Linux") and it's "GNU/Linux" because "it's a GNU userland on top of the Linux Kernel."

(He ignores the fact that hybrid embedded uses are becoming very popular and they often replace all the GNU userland except glibc with busybox while retaining binary compatibility.)

In fact, the article I mentioned previously showed that, if your system doesn't have GCC installed, GNU isn't a noteworthy component of modern Linux "by volume".

Hell, My "X11/Linux" example actually IS how browser User-Agent strings do it. ("Linux; X11" on desktops; "Linux; Android" on mobiles)

If Android and DirectFB weren't around, even X11/Linux would be redundant since it's not as if there are any OTHER GUI subsystems in use on Linux that have browsers built against them. (The GUI mode of links2 can be compiled against DirectFB and the gpm console mouse daemon. It's quite useful for Googling up solutions when X11 won't start for some reason.)

Edited 2013-01-08 12:26 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Re:
by FreeGamer on Tue 8th Jan 2013 00:51 in reply to "Re:"
FreeGamer Member since:
2007-04-13

Linux was a fully functional OS before it took any GNU code.


Sometimes when you don't know what you're talking about, it's best to say nothing at all.

That way you don't waste knowledgeable people's time with nonsense, you don't spread nonsense to those who don't know, and you don't look a fool.

Sadly it is too late this time around.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Re:
by HappyGod on Tue 8th Jan 2013 02:18 in reply to "RE: Re:"
HappyGod Member since:
2005-10-19

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt. - Abraham Lincoln.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Re:
by tylerdurden on Tue 8th Jan 2013 01:51 in reply to "Re:"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Linux was a fully functional OS before it took any GNU code.


Oh boy. You have zero clue about this matter, don't you?

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Re:
by dusanyu on Tue 8th Jan 2013 15:20 in reply to "Re:"
dusanyu Member since:
2006-01-21

Linux is just a Kernel So android is in fact "Linux" but sans GNU userland and tool Android/Linux would be a accurate name.

GNU/Linux is the Linux Kernel with the GNU tools and userland.

Lastly we could argue that Linux would not exist without GCC.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Re:
by kurkosdr on Tue 8th Jan 2013 19:33 in reply to "RE: Re:"
kurkosdr Member since:
2011-04-11

Linux is just a Kernel So android is in fact "Linux" but sans GNU userland and tool Android/Linux would be a accurate name


Yet another one infected with FSF propaganda. If you stop mindlessly copying stuff you 've read in fsf.org, you 'll find out that in the previous posts we enstablished that Linux was an OS before it took any GNU code. Hence, it wasn't "just a kernel". It was an OS.

And the "wouldn't exist without GCC"? Hilarious man. Not even Microsoft requires programmers that compile with visual studio to call their programs "MS/foo" or "VisualStudio/foo"

PS: Android (the new defense for the GNU/Linux nonsense) is a fork of Linux, that uses the kernel part of Linux only (and even that is modified).

I know Stallman acts super offended everytime someone says "Linux" to refer to the whole OS and he managed to convince you it should be true. I know Stallman says that Linux was "not usable by itself" (WRONG wrong wrong, Linux was BOOTABLE and usable before it took any GNU code). Sorry, Linux started as an OS, was an OS before it took any GNU code. Cheers

PS: What's hilarious is that non-kernel non-GNU code like init still exists in Linux. So, calling Linux "just a kernel" is silly beyond comprehension.

Edited 2013-01-08 19:41 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1