Thread replies: 8
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: 1489878573301.png (274KB, 600x552px) Image search:
[Google]
274KB, 600x552px
The term GNU/Linux for entire OS'es is also just as much bullshit. The vast majoiry of components of modern operating systems originate from neither the GNU project nor the Linux project. Did you know that the KDE project alone for instance has more LoC than the entire GNU project. Low level system components like systemd, Dash, procps, acpid, DBus $package_manager, they all come from neither. The idea that modern unixlike operating systems are "The GNU operating system with Linux being the last missing piece" is flagrantly wrong FSF propaganda. That is not how it went at all. GNU was never close to supplying a complete OS with only the kernel missing. People cannibalized upon the incomplete GNU OS together with a large bunch of other stuff to bolt together working operating systems.
"GNU/Linux" is irrelevant, it actually does not matter much whether you replace glibc with something else and GNU coreutils and GCC and what-not.
>>
>>59478664
>the KDE project alone for instance has more LoC than the entire GNU project.
I kinda doubt that, and LOC is a shitty measure anyway.
>GNU was never close to supplying a complete OS with only the kernel missing.
But that's actually true. That no one would want to use such a barebones system is a whole different matter.
>>
>>59478762
>But that's actually true.
Alright, then why does GNUs "OS" lack a mount binary, which is needed to boot?
>I kinda doubt that,
It's a fact.
>nd LOC is a shitty measure anyway.
The FSF uses that as a measure on the "Linux and GNU" page.
>If we tried to measure the GNU Project's contribution in this way, what would we conclude? One CD-ROM vendor found that in their “Linux distribution”, GNU software was the largest single contingent, around 28% of the total source code, and this included some of the essential major components without which there could be no system. Linux itself was about 3%. (The proportions in 2008 are similar: in the “main” repository of gNewSense, Linux is 1.5% and GNU packages are 15%.) So if you were going to pick a name for the system based on who wrote the programs in the system, the most appropriate single choice would be “GNU”.
>>
>>59479807
Gnome + gcc alone have more LOC than KDE, that's not even factoring in all the other GNU projects.
And who cares about what the FSF thinks? LOC is a shitty measure.
As for mounting, let the kernel do it.
>>
>>59479973
>And who cares about what the FSF thinks? LOC is a shitty measure.
The FSF is the creator of the term "GNU/Linux".
>Gnome + gcc
Lolwhat, GNOME is a redhat project at this point .
>As for mounting, let the kernel do it.
You need a userspace thing to do that (see: busybox mount or util-linux mount)
>>
>>59480057
Go and tell them that they are telling lies on the internet then
https://www.gnome.org/about/
>>
>>59480098
>https://www.gnome.org/about/
Alright explain to me why majority of GNOME developers are also RH employees then?
>>
>>59480231
Who cares?
Being an employee of RH does not prevent you from developing GNU project or other free software.
They probably even get paid by RH to do that.
Thread posts: 8
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1