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 547726
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Re:
by ssokolow on Tue 8th Jan 2013 00:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Re:"
Member since:

"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..

I don't remember the exact percentages, but I read an article several months ago which broke down various Linux distros and showed how, if you're going by percentages, you'd at LEAST have to call it X11/GNU/Linux since the constitutes at least as much code as all the GNU stuff on an average Linux system with GCC installed these days.

...but, seriously, GNU/Linux is NEVER going to catch on because it has too many syllables. Hell, a lot of novice users don't even say "Linux" these days, just thinking "Ubuntu" is the more significant moniker. (Also, when people say Linux, their intuition is generally interpreting the name as an application platform, so X11/Linux would be more accurate.)

Personally, I'd just like to see someone put in the effort to build a fully-functioning desktop distro which replaces GCC with LLVM/Clang, glibc with something like uClibc, etc. so we can just cut these GNU/Linux whiners' last leg out from under them.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[4]: Re:
by Serafean on Tue 8th Jan 2013 11:29 in reply to "RE[3]: Re:"
Serafean Member since:

You might try building Gentoo with those. It might take some doing, but from what I've read it's doable (provided you only use packages without GNUisms). I know I'll try sometime in the future ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Re:
by tankist on Wed 9th Jan 2013 23:00 in reply to "RE[3]: Re:"
tankist Member since:

FreeBSD 10 might be such "distro" with PC BSD as a desktop version.

Reply Parent Score: 2