Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   ity [unit X-69] - VIOLENT FUCK (ity@estradiol.city)'s status on Thursday, 11-Dec-2025 18:47:38 JST ity [unit X-69] - VIOLENT FUCK

   • Rafael Pérez 🌱

   @rperezrosario other, mostly Linux and BSDs, no GNU.

   • Embed this notice
     SuperDicq (superdicq@minidisc.tokyo)'s status on Thursday, 11-Dec-2025 18:47:33 JST SuperDicq

     in reply to

     • Dominik
     • Rafael Pérez 🌱

     @ity@estradiol.city @chrastecky@phpc.social @rperezrosario@mastodon.social Except without GNU neither the Linux kernel nor a freedom respecting version of BSD would have ever existed.

   • Embed this notice
     ity [unit X-69] - VIOLENT FUCK (ity@estradiol.city)'s status on Thursday, 11-Dec-2025 18:47:35 JST ity [unit X-69] - VIOLENT FUCK

     in reply to

     • Dominik
     • Rafael Pérez 🌱

     @chrastecky @rperezrosario not really, no, GNU never was that important of a part.

   • Embed this notice
     Dominik (chrastecky@phpc.social)'s status on Thursday, 11-Dec-2025 18:47:37 JST Dominik

     in reply to

     • Rafael Pérez 🌱

     @ity @rperezrosario Really no GNU? Isn't that kinda hard on Linux?

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 11-Dec-2025 19:52:33 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Dominik
     • Rafael Pérez 🌱
     @ity @chrastecky @rperezrosario >Poster who doesn't even know what OS they're using.
     
     I've inspected the so called "GNU-free Linux distros" and every single time I've realized that such distro's are GNU/Linux distros, that even use the GNU GRUB OS as the bootloader, except there are a handful of GNU packages swapped for inferior implementations, like musl instead of glibc (spoiler; not using a handful of GNU packages by default, while using the rest of GNU and having the package manager full of GNU, doesn't magically make a GNU/Linux distro not GNU/Linux).
     
     Alpine GNU/Linux even uses GNU coreutils (although there is a cut down installer that uses BusyBox coreutils instead just to be edgy - but really the "extended" installer is really the standard installer and the first thing that any sane user who uses the broken installer does, would be to install the missing parts of GNU via the package manager).
     
     (GNU is an important part of BusyBox, as a lot of ancient GNU code was copy-pasted into BusyBox).
   • Embed this notice
     SuperDicq (superdicq@minidisc.tokyo)'s status on Thursday, 11-Dec-2025 21:34:51 JST SuperDicq

     in reply to

     • Dominik
     • Rafael Pérez 🌱

     @ity@estradiol.city @chrastecky@phpc.social @rperezrosario@mastodon.social Just to clarify if Richard Stallman didn't convince the developers 386BSD to remove its proprietary components, all the modern BSD distributions that we have today would still be using proprietary Unix components.

   • Embed this notice
     SuperDicq (superdicq@minidisc.tokyo)'s status on Thursday, 11-Dec-2025 21:36:37 JST SuperDicq

     in reply to

     • Dominik
     • Rafael Pérez 🌱

     @ity@estradiol.city @chrastecky@phpc.social @rperezrosario@mastodon.social And Linux would be an irrelevant hobby project because there would have been no actual operating system to ship it with.

     翠星石 likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     SuperDicq (superdicq@minidisc.tokyo)'s status on Thursday, 11-Dec-2025 21:37:32 JST SuperDicq

     in reply to

     • Dominik
     • Rafael Pérez 🌱

     @ity@estradiol.city @chrastecky@phpc.social @rperezrosario@mastodon.social Oh and Linux wouldn't be free software either, it would've used Torvald's original proprietary license.

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 11-Dec-2025 21:41:55 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • SuperDicq
     • Dominik
     • Rafael Pérez 🌱
     @SuperDicq @chrastecky @ity @rperezrosario He and others convinced the developers to consider licensing under a free license, rather than a proprietary one.
     
     All modern BSD distributions are still using proprietary components derived from Unix, as all of them contain many unlicensed files.
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 11-Dec-2025 21:45:36 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • SuperDicq
     • Dominik
     • Rafael Pérez 🌱
     @SuperDicq @chrastecky @ity @rperezrosario Torvalds couldn't have even started to write Linux if it wasn't for GNU and GCC.
   • Embed this notice
     SuperDicq (superdicq@minidisc.tokyo)'s status on Thursday, 11-Dec-2025 22:33:02 JST SuperDicq

     in reply to

     • Dominik
     • Rafael Pérez 🌱

     @ity@estradiol.city @chrastecky@phpc.social @rperezrosario@mastodon.social Linux is just a kernel, it doesn't do much on it's own so people wouldn't be able to use it.
     
     What is the purpose of a kernel if you have no bootloader, no userland, no utilities, no shell, no standard libraries, etc.?

   • Embed this notice
     ity [unit X-69] - VIOLENT FUCK (ity@estradiol.city)'s status on Thursday, 11-Dec-2025 22:33:03 JST ity [unit X-69] - VIOLENT FUCK

     in reply to

     • SuperDicq
     • Dominik
     • Rafael Pérez 🌱

     @SuperDicq @chrastecky @rperezrosario What operating system? Sure, if we assume that GNU's contribution is RMS convincing others to open source stuff, what does that have to do with "having an actual operating system to ship it with"?

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 11-Dec-2025 22:57:55 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • SuperDicq
     • Dominik
     • Rafael Pérez 🌱
     @ity @SuperDicq @chrastecky @rperezrosario rms has never asked anyone to "open source" anything - he asks people to release software as free software.
     
     "open source" infidelity originated in 1998 - GNU originated in 1984.
     
     
     rms was the original developer of many GNU packages; https://www.gnu.org/software/
     
     Before there was no free C compiler, meaning it was impossible to have a free C OS or a free C kernel, but wrote the first version of GCC and released it.