Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Monday, 17-Jul-2023 05:20:53 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
   Why do people put a slash in GNU software names…
   
   GNU/Linux aka GNU+Linux, there's a separator because they are different software by different people, you can have GNU without Linux, you can have Linux without GNU.
   
   GNU social is the full name, GNU Make is GNU's implementation of make(1).
   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Monday, 17-Jul-2023 05:26:25 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • Dushman
     @dushman Yeah but bad example for my post as you cannot have systemd without linux (yet?).
   • Embed this notice
     Dushman (dushman@den.raccoon.quest)'s status on Monday, 17-Jul-2023 05:26:26 JST Dushman

     in reply to

     @lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
     Systemd + Linux

   • Embed this notice
     Glitch (glitch@pl.glitch.pm)'s status on Monday, 17-Jul-2023 06:15:22 JST Glitch

     in reply to
     @lanodan once you get past a certain sample size the amount of ways people refer to one thing will always include *many* incorrect references, especially when it comes to things like separators, dividers and similar such (it's the main reason I dropped leetspeak from my handle many years ago - there were like 5 ways to refer to me and it irritated the shit outta me).
     
     I think one reason why GNU/thing is so prevalent however is in part because of how insistent the FSFs shitfit was over Linux being named that way, which led to a lot of people doing it to all their projects because their takeaway is that that is how GNU would prefer to be credited.
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Monday, 17-Jul-2023 19:18:05 JST 翠星石

     in reply to
     @lanodan I just really enjoy prefixing things with GNU/ - I look for anything slightly GNU so I can add the GNU/.
     
     >you can have GNU without Linux
     Yes.
     
     >you can have Linux without GNU.
     Still no, as Linux apparently uses the GNU General Public License version 2 and good luck compiling it without using GNU software in some way - although in certain cases it's more meaningful to write BusyBox/Linux or systemd/Linux.
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Monday, 17-Jul-2023 19:23:33 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Glitch
     @glitch >GNU/thing is so prevalent however is in part because of how insistent the FSFs shitfit was over Linux being named that way
     The FSF never asked for the kernel, Linux to be called GNU - all they've ever asked for is for everyone to call GNU, "GNU" and Linux, "Linux", rather than calling GNU, "Linux": https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html
     
     For OS's that are a combination of the larger GNU OS, systemd and the smaller kernel, Linux, either GNU, GNU/Linux or GNU+Linux are all valid names, as you will arrive at a working OS by installing software only as named, meanwhile if you install just Linux, you'll get a panic() on boot.
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Monday, 17-Jul-2023 23:08:53 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Glitch
     @glitch >when the layperson talks about the three major desktop OSes
     Laypersons often incorrectly think a kernel is an OS? Who would have thought?: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html#osvskernel https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html#somanyright
     
     >Something heavily relying on GNU tools at the time
     GNU is not a mere collection of tools, it is a complete OS, although the needed tools for that OS were written: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html#tools
     
     >so the GNU project insisted it had to be prefixed to the name so they would seem more relevant
     If you want to talk about relevancy, although a kernel is required, which particular kernel is usually pretty irrelevant.
     
     Most software doesn't know or care if Linux happens to be the kernel, as most software tends to interface with the OS via libraries rather than directly to the kernel via SYSCALLs.
     
     The base library of the system that tends to carry out the required SYSCALLs is the libc and most versions of GNU/Linux use the best libc (glibc), which is designed to be portable between many kernels.
     
     GNU/Hurd is nowhere near finished, but if I remember correctly, 60%+ of software in the Debian GNU/Linux repos will compile and run on GNU/Hurd with no changes required and that is likely to increase to at least 80%+ once more bugs are fixed.
     
     >No OS since the early-to-mid 2000s has been just the coreutils anyway.
     GNU is not just the coreutils, that is only one GNU package: https://www.gnu.org/software/
     
     No OS has ever has been just Linux either, after all, even Linus agreed that just a kernel gets you nowhere: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html#linusagreed
     
     
     >Most practical desktop OSes have been mostly their DEs like KDE and Gnome.
     Although the DE is what the user sees, DE's rely heavily on other software and libraries to function, so "KDE/Linux" is very misleading - as you can't put together just KDE and Linux and get a working OS.
     
     If KDE cries out for mention, you should write: GNU/KDE/Linux: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html#many
     
     
     >the KDE people didn't mobilize an army of reply guys to tell you why it's GNU/Linux.
     GNU hasn't put the slightest bit of effort into mobilizing an army, freedom enjoyers like me have decided on their own to spread the good word of freedom despite how hard people try to prevent others from learning about GNU and the free software movement (instead aiming to steer the users towards the proprietary degeneracy of "open source").
     
     If it was common to incorrectly call KDE, "Linux", there would be an army of interjectors all the same.
   • Embed this notice
     Glitch (glitch@pl.glitch.pm)'s status on Monday, 17-Jul-2023 23:08:55 JST Glitch

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     @Suiseiseki when the layperson talks about the three major desktop OSes it's gonna be windows, macOS and Linux (or just the major server OS). That's what the shitfit was about. Something heavily relying on GNU tools at the time got popular, it wasn't named GNU so the GNU project insisted it had to be prefixed to the name so they would seem more relevant.
     
     No OS since the early-to-mid 2000s has been just the coreutils anyway. Most practical desktop OSes have been mostly their DEs like KDE and Gnome. Calling it KDE/Linux is just as appropriate as GNU/Linux, yet the KDE people didn't mobilize an army of reply guys to tell you why it's GNU/Linux.
   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Tuesday, 18-Jul-2023 00:10:22 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     @Suiseiseki You can compile linux unmodified with the full LLVM/Clang toolchain, that's been a thing for quite a while now.
     And gpl-2 doesn't means a lack of portability.
     
     >I look for anything slightly GNU so I can add the GNU/.
     
     I'd do almost the opposite, like how I'd almost call GNU Emacs, Gosling Emacs instead (specially as Stalledman often says he wrote Emacs, which he didn't).
     
     >BusyBox/Linux
     Nack, -linux-musl vs. linux-gnu* is the meaningful one, for binaries that is, x86_64-pc-linux-gnu is my Wintel.
     
     >systemd/Linux
     You forgot X11 :)
   • Embed this notice
     Johnny Peligro (mischievoustomato@marsey.moe)'s status on Tuesday, 18-Jul-2023 00:13:28 JST Johnny Peligro

     in reply to
     @lanodan Fate/Prisma Illya Kaleid Liner
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Tuesday, 18-Jul-2023 01:02:28 JST 翠星石

     in reply to
     @lanodan >You can compile linux unmodified with the full LLVM/Clang toolchain, that's been a thing for quite a while now.
     Why would you carry out such cucked activities rather than compiling with the superior, better optimizing, freedom defending, gcc?
     
     >Gosling Emacs instead (specially as Stalledman often says he wrote Emacs, which he didn't).
     If I remember correctly, rms got permission to carry out the four freedoms with Gosling Emacs and improved it, rewriting many files, but after a while, Gosling realized that rms's version of Emacs was far superior to his original version and tried to put a stop to the freedom - in response rms just went and replaced the few remaining original sections so Gosling didn't have a claim anymore.
     
     GNU Emacs has been developed for decades and it's in no way similar to Gosling Emacs anymore, so it's GNU Emacs.
     
     >Nack, -linux-musl vs. linux-gnu* is the meaningful one
     That's a name from the compiler listing the kernel and libc the binary is compiled for, which allows you to take a guess which libc ABI the binary will work with, but that fails to mention the other parts of the OS, which may be required for the binary to work.
     
     I cannot fathom why you would compare the proprietary losetel to 100% free software that's compiled against the finest GNU libraries that happens to be compiled for AMD64 - after all, take a guess how much proprietary software my dual 6282 SE's in my KGPE-D16 runs?
   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Tuesday, 18-Jul-2023 03:20:34 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     @Suiseiseki The GNU Emacs thing is often because Stallman and GNU/FSF folks love claiming that RMS invented or wrote Emacs, this isn't a copyright thing, this is about having correct history without trying to erase previous records.
     
     >I cannot fathom why you would compare the proprietary losetel to 100% free software that's compiled against the finest GNU libraries that happens to be compiled for AMD64 - after all, take a guess how much proprietary software my dual 6282 SE's in my KGPE-D16 runs?
     
     The comparison I would do is on vendor locking and effectively the EEE on Unix that GNU tried to do where now you end up with a bunch of crapware, GNU being pretty damn far from being the only libre OS vendor out there.
     (And I'd argue you likely have blobs on your machine, GNU is crap at consistency except when it comes to politics)
   • Embed this notice
     Sexy Moon (moon@shitposter.club)'s status on Tuesday, 18-Jul-2023 03:28:24 JST Sexy Moon

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     @lanodan @Suiseiseki stallman wrote a version of emacs for the pdp or something, gnu emacs was gosmacs after stallman completely replaced the lisp interpreter with one that didn't suck. some people on functional.cafe were claiming stallman stole it, it is the opposite, one of the maintainers got a job at a place that wanted to sell it and they tried to welch on the permissive license.
   • Embed this notice
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: (lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me)'s status on Tuesday, 18-Jul-2023 03:51:10 JST Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:

     in reply to

     • Sexy Moon
     • 翠星石
     @Moon @Suiseiseki I did say it isn't a copyright thing, if it had to be a law thing it would be with moral rights, which is maybe why Gosling's code got removed.
     It's a history thing, literally the "I made this" meme, quite like if somehow Pleroma or Mastodon would claim they wrote the fediverse.
   • Embed this notice
     Sexy Moon (moon@shitposter.club)'s status on Tuesday, 18-Jul-2023 03:53:33 JST Sexy Moon

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     @lanodan @Suiseiseki I am also dismayed when I see the claim that stallman invented emacs.
     
     my understanding is the reason stallman replaced the lisp was the list in gosmacs was simply not a full lisp and it offended him
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Mitch Conner (olmitch@shitposter.club)'s status on Tuesday, 18-Jul-2023 04:11:45 JST Mitch Conner

     in reply to

     • Sexy Moon
     • 翠星石
     @Moon @lanodan @Suiseiseki OK so people forgot the GNU part. It is his program though.
   • Embed this notice
     Sexy Moon (moon@shitposter.club)'s status on Tuesday, 18-Jul-2023 04:11:45 JST Sexy Moon

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • Mitch Conner
     @olmitch @Suiseiseki @lanodan it wasn't created by stallman, as mentioned it used to be gosmacs and he took the code and eventually replaced all of it
   • Embed this notice
     Mitch Conner (olmitch@shitposter.club)'s status on Tuesday, 18-Jul-2023 04:16:37 JST Mitch Conner

     in reply to

     • Sexy Moon
     • 翠星石
     @Moon @Suiseiseki @lanodan I feel like by this logic Ford deserves sole credit for every car ever built. We all stand on the shoulders of giants.
   • Embed this notice
     Sexy Moon (moon@shitposter.club)'s status on Tuesday, 18-Jul-2023 04:16:37 JST Sexy Moon

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • Mitch Conner
     @olmitch @Suiseiseki @lanodan if the article said he completely rewrote gosmacs I'd be happy
     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Wednesday, 19-Jul-2023 00:09:07 JST 翠星石

     in reply to
     @lanodan I haven't even heard of a claim that rms "invented" the concept of Emacs before - it's called GNU Emacs and not just Emacs for a reason.
     
     rms was the original author of GNU Emacs and it's ridiculous to claim otherwise.
     
     rms when talking about GNU Emacs doesn't hesitate to mention the many different versions of Emacs that existed prior.
     
     It's pretty obvious that every nontrivial piece of software is only possible due to the work of thousands of authors, although the excellent work of a single author is often the thing that brings everything together.
     
     >I would do is on vendor locking and effectively the EEE on Unix that GNU tried to do
     What are you even on about?
     
     rms set out to write a fully free software OS first and foremost, but made the wise decision to be compatible with an existing OS with a not too terrible, modular design - there's no "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" when the aim from the very start is to replace all proprietary OS's and not specifically Unix.
     
     >where now you end up with a bunch of crapware
     GNU software is the best software that you can possible get, simply because you can be sure it's free software, but it also happens to be usually functionally the best.
     
     >GNU being pretty damn far from being the only libre OS vendor out there.
     GNU is the ONLY non-toy, 100% free software OS.
     
     All other non-toy OS's I've looked at are chock full of proprietary software, this includes every single BSD (oh no, coping incoming).
     
     >I'd argue you likely have blobs on your machine
     Yes, hardware is inherently proprietary, news at 11.