@Suiseiseki

>It is GNU bash

What makes you think that?

> Facepalm into the nether realm.

If the point was that Linux supports the necessary Unix interfaces to be called a Unix, then the point is made. Would you prefer I use a different compiler and link against a different libc?

> >cal instead of gcal
> Sad!

$ cd src/unix/v7/usr/src/cmd
$ ls gcal*
/bin/ls: cannot access 'gcal*': No such file or directory
$ cd ..
$ find -iname '*gcal*'
$

Doesn't look like anything by that name shipped with v7.

>uname

> Linux was proprietary software in 1991,

I wouldn't call it proprietary: the license required it to be distributed gratis and with source.

> but was released under the GPLv2-ambigious in 1996.

It was, according to Linus, GPL in late 1991 or early 1992. The release notes for 0.12 ( https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/old-versions/RELNOTES-0.12 ) indicate that unless anyone objected, "Otherwise The GNU copyleft takes effect as of the first of February [1992]." (The last timestamp in the 0. The GPLv2 appears in the COPYING file as of 1.0 but before that, the release notes just say "get a copy of the GNU copyleft at any major ftp-site (if it carries linux, it probably carries a lot of GNU software anyway, and they all contain the copyright)." ( https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/old-versions/RELNOTES-0.95 )

> One of many examples of proprietary software added to Linux is this; https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/powerpc/platforms/8xx/micropatch.c (the binary form is array encoded and there is no source code).

This code contains a firmware binary to overwrite the binary firmware that was already in the machine. Whether or not this constitutes "linking" is murky, as I understand it. Because I like code so I became a programmer rather than a corporate attorney; consequently, I'm afraid I can't help you with that and am bored by it. Of course, Plan 9 is GPL'd.

> When it comes to the license of Linux, generally it is only enforced *against* freedom, rather than in support of it.

It uses a free software license. I believe this is sufficient. If anyone gives you a copy of the software in binary form and does not supply the source, you can get the source from them, by the terms of the license.