Notices by :segasaturn: (takao@shitposter.world), page 6
Embed this notice:segasaturn: (takao@shitposter.world)'s status on Saturday, 05-Oct-2024 00:07:32 JST
:segasaturn:The debate over whether to call the operating system "Linux" or "GNU/Linux" (or "GNU+Linux") stems from the contributions of both the Linux kernel and the GNU Project to the system most people use today. The term "Linux" technically refers only to the kernel, the core part of the operating system that manages hardware and system resources. However, the majority of the utilities and tools that users interact with on a daily basis come from the GNU Project¹.
The GNU Project, initiated by Richard Stallman in 1983, aimed to create a free Unix-like operating system. By the early 1990s, the GNU system was almost complete, lacking only a kernel. This gap was filled by Linus Torvalds' Linux kernel, released in 1991¹. When combined, the GNU tools and the Linux kernel formed a fully functional operating system, which many refer to simply as "Linux." However, this name overlooks the significant contributions of the GNU Project².
Calling the system "GNU/Linux" acknowledges the collaborative effort between the GNU Project and the Linux kernel. The GNU tools include essential components like the GNU C Library (glibc), the GNU Core Utilities (coreutils), and the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC), which are crucial for the system's functionality². Without these tools, the Linux kernel alone would not provide a usable operating system.
The name "GNU/Linux" also helps to educate users about the origins and development of the software they are using. Many users mistakenly believe that Linus Torvalds created the entire operating system, when in fact, he developed only the kernel. Recognizing the system as "GNU/Linux" highlights the broader community effort and the historical context of the free software movement¹.
Moreover, the GNU Project's philosophy of software freedom is a fundamental aspect of the system. The GNU General Public License (GPL), under which both the GNU tools and the Linux kernel are released, ensures that the software remains free for all users to use, modify, and distribute. This commitment to freedom is a core value of the GNU Project and is integral to the identity of the operating system².
Using the term "GNU/Linux" also aligns with the principles of transparency and credit where it is due. It acknowledges the work of the many developers who contributed to the GNU Project over the years. This recognition can foster a greater appreciation for the collaborative nature of free software development and encourage more contributions from the community¹.
The distinction between "Linux" and "GNU/Linux" is not just a matter of semantics; it reflects the structure and components of the operating system. While the kernel is a critical part, it is the combination with the GNU tools that makes the system complete and functional. This holistic view is important for understanding how the system works and for appreciating the contributions of both projects².
Furthermore, the name "GNU/Linux" can help to differentiate the system from other operating systems that use the Linux kernel but do not include the GNU tools. For example, Android uses the Linux kernel but has a completely different set of user-space tools and libraries. Referring to the system as "GNU/Linux" clarifies that it is a specific combination of the Linux kernel and GNU tools¹.
The debate over the name also touches on broader issues of branding and identity within the free software community. The term "Linux" has become widely recognized and associated with the open-source movement, but it can obscure the contributions of the GNU Project. By using "GNU/Linux," advocates aim to ensure that the GNU Project's role is not forgotten and that its principles of software freedom are highlighted².
In conclusion, calling the operating system "GNU/Linux" or "GNU+Linux" is a way to accurately represent the contributions of both the Linux kernel and the GNU Project. It acknowledges the collaborative effort that created the system, educates users about its history and structure, and aligns with the principles of transparency and credit. This naming convention helps to preserve the identity and values of the free software movement, ensuring that the contributions of all developers are recognized and appreciated¹².
@newt@kaia it was used in Sandisk's Sansa line of MP3 players for example but supposedly they discontinued those. You'd be able to buy SD cards preloaded with music but without any means of accessing the data except using a compatible device, spooky stuff.
@thendrix@icedquinn@caekislove@mischievoustomato@sj_zero@zero@pettanko it's kind of worth noting that CDPR only started using their custom engine from the second game onward. The first game used a heavily modified Aurora engine by Bioware (used in Neverwinter Nights) which they had to wrangle into doing what they wanted and it was painful enough to make them go in-house for the second game.
@lanodan some days, I wonder if we should accelerate and burn everything down to the ground. It is pretty interesting to wonder how many lines of bloat we could cross before the world ends.