Names for GNU/Linux that you like

[diligentcircle]

EDIT: This originally asked for favorites, but I've changed it to what names you like, as a multiple-choice question. I think that's more interesting. The choices are:

• "GNU/Linux": Expresses that the system is a combination of the GNU operating system and Linux. Has been misinterpreted by many people (including Linus Torvalds himself) as claiming that GNU "made Linux", perhaps because its most natural pronunciation sounds the same as "GNU Linux".
• "GNU+Linux": Expresses the same thing as "GNU/Linux", but written a different way.
• "Linux/GNU": Expresses the same basic idea as "GNU/Linux", but mentions "Linux" first, perhaps suggesting that Linux is more important than GNU. Also can't easily be misinterpreted the way "GNU/Linux" commonly is, because while many people incorrectly assume that "GNU" is an organization, it is common knowledge that Linux is some sort of software.
• "Linux+GNU": Expresses the same thing as "Linux/GNU", but written a different way.
• "Linux GNU": Expresses that the system is "the Linux variant of GNU", i.e. the GNU system but with Linux as the kernel.
• "LiGNUx": A suggestion made by the FSF in the 1990s which was ultimately rejected. It combines "GNU" and "Linux" into one word.
• "GNU": Omits mention of Linux entirely, suggesting that it is unimportant.
• "Linux": Omits mention of GNU entirely, suggesting that it is unimportant. Currently the most popular name for the system, but rejected by the Free Software Foundation.

 

[sebt3]

The GNU sytem exist on its own But geez, the FSF havent found the motivation to code a sound system in 20 years. Still no sound in the GNU system, let alone a 3d system.

Beside using only GNU to describe GNU/Linux is as wrong as just using Linux.

If I had to choose, I'ld go with GNU/Linux. There is more and more options to use Linux without GNU. Android/Linux come to my mind but not only. One could build a linux distribution build using llvm and using core and file-utils alternative (like what we have on our pandy) and having not a single line of code from GNU.

I realy think the GNU zealot should stay at their place or they will be replaced. Is the OS on the pandora a XFCE/busybox/Linux ?

 

[diligentcircle]

The GNU sytem exist on its own But geez, the FSF havent found the motivation to code a sound system in 20 years. Still no sound in the GNU system, let alone a 3d system.

It's not really laziness, it's just there not being a need. The same thing is true for a window manager; X worked fine, so there was never one developed for GNU.

There is more and more options to use Linux without GNU. Android/Linux come to my mind but not only. One could build a linux distribution build using llvm and using core and file-utils alternative (like what we have on our pandy) and having not a single line of code from GNU.

Android and GNU/Linux are two completely different systems. Just because something can be replaced doesn't mean it's irrelevant. It's because it doesn't have GNU that Android is so different from GNU/Linux. On the other hand, GNU/kFreeBSD and GNU/Hurd are basically the same system as GNU/Linux for most people, despite having completely different kernels.

Is the OS on the pandora a XFCE/busybox/Linux ?

The OS on the Pandora is GNU/Linux. If you feel the DE is so worth mentioning, perhaps it's GNU/Xfce/Linux.

Android is a completely different OS which also runs on the Pandora, and it can be called "Linux" just as accurately as the default GNU/Linux OS. I think this shows pretty clearly how absurd the name "Linux" is.

 

[Binky]

Android is a completely different OS

Isn't that rather overstating it?

While I agree that there are big differences between GNU/Linux and Android/Linux, they share an almost identical kernel - which I would say is a pretty major part of any operating system.

Android is a distinct OS, perhaps...

 

[diligentcircle]

I don't think it's overstating it. Android is nothing like GNU/Linux. The kernel only defines how the system talks to the hardware, not what the system is like for users.

 

[comradekingu]

The GNU sytem exist on its own But geez, the FSF havent found the motivation to code a sound system in 20 years. Still no sound in the GNU system, let alone a 3d system.


Beside using only GNU to describe GNU/Linux is as wrong as just using Linux.


If I had to choose, I'ld go with GNU/Linux. There is more and more options to use Linux without GNU. Android/Linux come to my mind but not only. One could build a linux distribution build using llvm and using core and file-utils alternative (like what we have on our pandy) and having not a single line of code from GNU.

There is the GNU/Hurd, you can try it in debian. Except for all the lines of code in the Linux kernel covered by GPLv2. And whatever userland things you have on top of that. That GNU is a philosophy rather than a sticker term that is slapped on anything remotely qualifying is something i approve of. It is a telling tale why Android isnt better. Just as its possible to have Android/BSD, the underlying kernel isnt what takes away the GNU in the android experience for me.

 

[Mr_Loon]

It's called Linux, that's the way language works, things become called what the vast majority of people call them.


Just be happy you've got a bus


Jim Gettys : There are lots of people on this bus; I don't hear a clamor of support that GNU is more essential than many of the other components; can't take a wheel away, and end up with a functional vehicle, or an engine, or the seats. I recommend you be happy we have a bus.

 

[diligentcircle]

Or be unhappy that people are doing bad things for the bus (making GNU/Linux less free) because they don't know the original purpose for building it.

GNU/Linux, as it is today, is not "mission accomplished". People are still using proprietary software. The cause of freedom is helped by people knowing that GNU/Linux was started by idealists who wanted them to be free, not just some hobbyist who was bored one day.

 

[sebt3]

It's not really laziness, it's just there not being a need. The same thing is true for a window manager; X worked fine, so there was never one developed for GNU.

...

On the other hand, GNU/kFreeBSD and GNU/Hurd are basically the same system as GNU/Linux for most people, despite having completely different kernels.

Have you ever tried GNU/Hurd, jesus !!!!! No sound, no 3d, not many thing that works in fact, and you're telling me that it could replace Linux ?Give the hurd kernel the 20years of code it is missing and i'll agree with you. I havent tried GNU/kFreeBSD, but I'm not expecting it to work on may hardware, and I'm betting there is a compatibility layer between gnu and the freebsd kernel.

The OS on the Pandora is GNU/Linux. If you feel the DE is so worth mentioning, perhaps it's GNU/Xfce/Linux.

You're telling me that xfce is barely requiering a mention. Yet on pandora, we are using gcc, libc and part of core utils and part of file utils (the other parts are from busybox).I would bet there is more code in xfce than all the gnu stuff we are using (remember that I've built the image a few times already so I kinda know what's in...)

Saying that this is GNU/Linux is as wrong as XFCE/Linux... Let's say wre are using a GNU/busybox/xfce/Xorg/close-source/Linux. Maybe should we add sudo and a few others in the global name, it would be more clear what we are using... And believe me, gnu could be completly removed from the name.

You are just a GNU troll that havent seen that GNU is losing revelance at a fast speed.

Go use your broken GNU only system and let the normal user use their system in peace, please

 

[SNESFAN]

I don't think it's overstating it. Android is nothing like GNU/Linux. The kernel only defines how the system talks to the hardware, not what the system is like for users.

While the difference in user experience is significant. Conical's ubuntu for android says in their test environment both ubuntu and android share the same linux kernel... so android is or at least can be linux, android will be using a mainlined linux in the future. But as you're saying that isn't what the user experiences, it's just whats on the top that is significant. So I believe the statement of android isn't a gnu variant like what most people think of when talking about "linux"

I have been recently digging into what makes gnu/linux so unlike android/linux and for user experience and for one major peice is the interface. Right off the bat, and most obvious difference is GNU/LINUX has a window manager xorg/x10/xserver/xwindows I believe it is.

I recently found this. https://code.google.com/p/android-xserver/ or here http://my20percent.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/android-x-server/ it's x for android written in java, it's not perfect and contains a lot of bugs, but it's semi-functional and allows or would allow linux applications to be natively ran in android. Someone was messing with their own implementation of xlib and got XFCE to load but they were saying it's not the best experience. The whole project I feel is worth looking into and it's still in active development, last update was in January though. If people were to make this fully functional I think it would remove a large portion of the difference in what the user experiences.

So eventually gnu linux applications can be ran in android, and also with busy box, lots of the same basic command line tools can be ran too. That area could also be beefed up, so if some are ported or available couldn't every command line tool be tied into android as well?

There's lots of backend stuff that's different and I'm looking into what are all the parts of linux and how each could be adapted for android. Linux in it's self is a frankenstein of many many different parts all blended together to make it what it is today, I don't think it's a solid peice of non-sculptable marble that can't be adapted for it's intended purpose the same way when I look at android. All the parts can be messed with and adapted to function the way you want. You could in theory frankenstein them both together and get the best of both worlds I feel. I think that's what ubuntu for android is trying to do, but I even think they are going in the wrong direction still leaving a giant rift between the two with parts crossing in the middle.

It's going to take a much more talented person than myself and probably many teams of people with the same vision to make it possible, but I feel it *IS* possible to converge the two. There are people on the outside pointing out the flaws, and there's people trying to make the situation better. Which one are you? (general question to the reader, not the quoted)

 

[_wb_]

See this post for a useful analogy to understand the situation:

http://boards.openpandora.org/index.php/topic/13939-linux-on-the-bottom/page-3#entry264007

Besides the technical reasons for giving credit to GNU, there is also a moral reason: the GNU project was the original project that got the ambition to create a Free OS, which lead to the popularization of the concept of Free Software and the creation of the GPL. This is what makes GNU unique in the FOSS landscape: none of the other components can claim to be at the origin of Free Software. It is because of the influence of the GNU Project that X became Free, BSD got Free branches, the Linux kernel was released under the GPL, and so on. So even if you have a distro in which only 5% of the code is from GNU software (which is not at all the case in typical GNU/Linux distros), there would be an important argument to give credit GNU, since it's not just about who wrote the most lines of code, but about the spirit of the project.

 

[SNESFAN]

I'm going to respond to that thread then, it's more on topic with my points.

 

[diligentcircle]

Have you ever tried GNU/Hurd, jesus !!!!! No sound, no 3d, not many thing that works in fact, and you're telling me that it could replace Linux ?


Give the hurd kernel the 20years of code it is missing and i'll agree with you. I havent tried GNU/kFreeBSD, but I'm not expecting it to work on may hardware, and I'm betting there is a compatibility layer between gnu and the freebsd kernel.

The Hurd is unstable (prone to crashes) and nowhere near as good as Linux when it comes to hardware support. I would never recommend it to anyone wanting to use an OS for actual work, and I would never use it. "No sound", though, is a result of not communicating with sound cards properly, and "no 3d" is a result of not communicating with video cards properly (i.e. not having drivers). If you have a sound card the Hurd supports, you would have sound. If you had a driver for the Hurd to give you 3-D acceleration, you would have 3-D acceleration.


The system itself is basically the same thing, assuming it works on your hardware and doesn't crash.


I'm not sure why you think the kernel of FreeBSD is so terrible. BSD is a perfectly good and well-developed Unix system.

You are just a GNU troll that havent seen that GNU is losing revelance at a fast speed.


Go use your broken GNU only system and let the normal user use their system in peace, please

I never said I want to use a GNU only system. I think that the GNU system is important and deserves at least equal mention. If you really think that a Linux-only system without GNU is such a great system, be my guest and use an OS suitable only for basic appliances. We both know that isn't true, though. You use GNU, and without it the system you're using would be very crappy.

You're telling me that xfce is barely requiering a mention. Yet on pandora, we are using gcc, libc and part of core utils and part of file utils (the other parts are from busybox).


I would bet there is more code in xfce than all the gnu stuff we are using (remember that I've built the image a few times already so I kinda know what's in...)


Saying that this is GNU/Linux is as wrong as XFCE/Linux... Let's say wre are using a GNU/busybox/xfce/Xorg/close-source/Linux. Maybe should we add sudo and a few others in the global name, it would be more clear what we are using... And believe me, gnu could be completly removed from the name.

It seems you never read the GNU/Linux FAQ.[0]


[0] https://gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html#many

 

[FelixNemis]

Calling it "Linux" is a misnomer, and like a lot of misnomers, we seem to be stuck with it. The thing about languages is that they change and warp all the time. Whether you call it Linux or GNU/Linux doesn't actually matter as far as language is concerned.

The reason "Linux" is a misnomer is that Linux started out as something completely different, but was used to make a complete UNIX-like OS by supplying a missing piece of the GNU OS project.

If you start making a free car design called GRacecar but you have difficulty making wheels for it, so you use Wheelix wheels. Wheelix doesn't make sense as a name for the car. If you add many parts from other projects to the car until the GRacecar parts are a much smaller percentage, it doesn't really mean that the name should be any different. For both the GNU project and the GRacecar project it doesn't matter if you they don't design any of the parts, assuming the parts you use are free and work well than the goal of the project is fulfilled.

At this point however, it's called Linux simply because that's what people call it, this may change in the future however. The fact that many people are ignorant of the original purpose that produced a free (though many versions have "nonfree" parts) OS is not actually related to the name at all. If the name GNU/Linux would solve this problem then why do you think people stopped calling it that and started using "Linux".

 

[diligentcircle]

Who's choosing the same answer for multiple questions? Please don't do that. Choose three different answers.

 

[dgame]

Hoover did not invent the vacuum cleaner. Not all vacuum cleaners are Hoovers.

I once tried to explain to my English Aunt that her hoover was a vacuum cleaner and not a Hoover. She shook her head and laughed.

I have a nickname that I don't like. At first I fought it and it went away. Then it came back and now that's what my friends call me.

It unfortunate for GNU that the eponym for "GNU/Linux" is Linux.

Linux is the de facto name now.  You said it yourself "...other than the misnomer "Linux", people like better. "

So how do you change what society has named something.

 

[SNESFAN]

^ you call it ubuntu and stop referring to it as linux.... you also remove every reference to the word linux from your website

crap... we went in the wrong direction with that one didn't we... sorry

 

[comradekingu]

Linux is still linux, the problem arises when people say they use linux. Which used to be just technically incorrect, in any meaningful sense (since linux is the kernel and not the OS.) However now you have android linux too, and then it becomes non-descriptive as well.

Saying xfce is an integral part of the picture isn't incorrect, but it misses the bigger picture. You say you use gnu linux because GNU is what makes it a usable system. Lets say that thats the point you are trying to make, in general, rather than some distro. (android is not a distro, its another OS)

Xfce is GPL, and there are GNU programs and whatnot, but thats not the point. It started with FOSS and the idea behind that movement is what you are paying homage to when you are titulating a system that qualifies as GNU.

And hurd being inferior to anything isnt the whole picture, it might be technically this and that, but that is beside the point. The point is freedom, it is a fully free software, (as in freedom) system, regardless of state.

Im not saying its irrelevant, but the point that matters is the same one where windows doesnt stack up to a apples to apples comparison to linux. Because disregarding freedom is disregarding the biggest single difference there is. And yes, practical use is the everyday value of that, but lets not forget the ideal.

 

[Znirk]

GNU/Linux, as it is today, is not "mission accomplished". People are still using proprietary software. The cause of freedom is helped by people knowing that GNU/Linux was started by idealists who wanted them to be free, not just some hobbyist who was bored one day.

But that's only relevant if this specific style of freedom!!eleventyone! happens to be your mission. So the GNU projects and their friends don't have a monopoly in the field of computer software? You could legitimately refer to that situation as free-er (in a 'freedom of choice' sense) than the hypothetical GNU monoculture.

I suggest you start distinguishing GNU/freedom from the more ordinary, real-world language usage of the word freedom. And yes, this is only partially a joke. I am grateful to GNU, their Stallman and the many other free software activists for all their work, but there's still a gap between gratitude and putting up with marketing-driven redefinitions and exclusivity claims on important and useful words.

 

[_wb_]

I don't think GNU is claiming exclusivity to "freedom", not even within the area of computer software freedom - if they would claim exclusivity, then why would they endorse licenses like Apache, BSD, CC, MPL, MIT, NPL, QPL, XFree86, and zlib?

As for having a monopoly, oligopoly or "free" market of software, that is not really the point. Getting to choose your master is not the same as freedom. Freedom of choice between different brands of proprietary software is not sufficient at all.