@BrodieOnLinux >GNU's importance is lowered to merely be the "GNU tooling", which is only one part of GNU and then only later raised. Hurd development started early 1991 once the licensing issues with Mach were resolved - so I don't see where he got "years" from. >Mentions that there could have been all pure 100% GNU/Freedom if Linux didn't exist, but calls that "FOSS". Nothing from MINIX was actually used in the kernel, Linux - I don't even think it even had an influence on its design - Linus happen to have used MINIX until he got sick of its design and decided to start writing his own OS, but only ever ended up writing the kernel. >We haven't seen any major ME vulnerabilities Aside from all the major ones intel has succeeded in covering up.
They did have to wait years for Mach's licensing issue to be resolved and wrote other parts of GNU while they waited.
Nobody could use any Berkley Software Distribution software for many years as they had handled licensing poorly from the start, plus used things like the 4-clause BSD (as soon as you combine more than 2 pieces of software into a system under that license, the requirements turns into a bad joke).
While GNU re-used existing software if it existed, it avoided software under unclear licensing terms, as there was a real risk of a business turning around and saying "that software must be proprietary" and GNU would have no choice but to drop everything that was developed.