I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use.
Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

  • 12
    Understandable. Have a nice day.
  • 6
    Long but interesting and totally worth it.
  • 8
    A you secretly Richard Stallman? Coz that's exactly what he'd LOVE to point out
  • 7
    Is this original or copypasta?
    Because I would totally believe both
  • 7
    @speedForce I think this is partly a quote from his website. I assume the reason why the Linux name stuck is because the name GNU sucks ass, while Linux is cool and easy.

    Also, GNU stuff is usually represented online with websites from the 90s, so you're tempted to think that's some super ancient stuff, regardless of they actually being at the core of many things you do. I don't know much about this though.
  • 6
    @speedForce sounds like Stallman, feels like Stallman:D
    @mzeffect I really believe the GNU project has huge marketing problems.
    The name is certainly not helping, but I think the website is really killing it.
    And in fact, Stallman as it's frontman is just not sympathic. He has his moments, but mostly he's publicly blaming people for using wrong terms, or that's what it feels like(I mean, there's tons of videos for that).
    Or he's saying the same stuff he always says in mostly the same words, then sounding completely dogmatic.
    In contrast linus torvalds, although he also often pisses people off(but not for the damn words they use!), he is also a sympathic person - humble and funny - or that's what he seems like.
    If you have the right marketing, you can even sell shit software.
    That's nothing different, best marketing gets the name.
  • 6
    I say just Linux on purpose since I cannot stand that quirky motherfucker.
  • 2
    Unless you are using busybox.
    Or uclib.
    No GNU there.
  • 4
    Or you could go with "LiGNUx" which according to Wikipedia was Stallman's initial proposal.
  • 3
    @Linux This was posted some time ago from @Sam9669.
  • 3
    How about just GNUL?
  • 4
    @Root it's a copypasta
  • 4
    If you like GNU/Linux, make more people like it. People don't like long cryptic names. Please leave your religion at home when doing marketing. Thank you.
  • 5
    PS: I know the history lessons, I'm using Linux for over 10 years now and I'm calling it Linux on purpose.
  • 2
    What about GNU/NT
  • 4
    I always say GNU/Linux because I respect the very important work Richard Stallman and the other developers of the GNU system have done for humanity. Without them, there wouldn't be a free operating system and nothing that we call "Linux". We would be all stuck with Windows and Apple and their proprietory software. So giving them a little bit credit by not being fucky lazy to say just a word shouldn't be too much asked.
  • 3
    @binop "thank you for being part of amazing-thing"
    R.S: "what you know as amazing-thing is actually mamamela-amazing-thing and people need to blah blah blah"

    People that use and love the system know that it would not have been possible without GNU, people that use the system know that GNU is in the mix. It is not about being Lazy, but rather knowing that the community is smart enough already to know the distinction. But lets say that we want to be assholes about it. According to RS, he does not endorse distributions that do not provide omgCompleteFreeSoftware.To him they barely exist, why would it bother him to then reffer to them as merely Linux?
  • 5
    Found this drawing online.
  • 3
    I wasn't going to further reply, but,anyway, here's my 2 cents:
    I've used Linux for a really long time. It was called Linux. Period.
    GNU was busy developing Hurd, for them Linux was just a step until their grandiose dream was complete.
    When it become obvious their kernel wasn't going anywhere, Stallman came with this speech.
    It always rubbed me in the wrong way. Sounds petty.
    I'll change my nomenclature the day Linus does it too.
  • 1
    @nbamaral exactly. Thank you. He is really petty with this stuff. And his views on free software and how everything should be free are way too radical.
  • 2
    And what about the great Pottering masterpiece? And ubiquitous Xorg?
    Should I call Debian Xorg/Systemd/GNU/Linux now? 😄
    It's just nonsense and politics, it has no place in OSS. Too old for this.
Add Comment