122
submitted 6 months ago by Tekkip20@lemmy.world to c/linux@lemmy.ml

I've tried using my incredible (british) brain using Google to see if these open source titans ever engaged in a battle of "friendly conversation" with one another.

I was always interested what Stallman thought of the angry but smart finnish man who gave us the robust penguin kernel that breathes life into older machines and powers supercomputers for the weather.

The same with Torvalds thoughts on Stallmans GNU involvement and him as a person.

This is because you sometimes had different organisations in the FOSS and OSS community that take on different meanings so I wanted a better idea if these chaps ever spoke in an interview together.

TLDR : Does finnish man like bearded GNU jesus man and the same vice versa

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com 80 points 6 months ago

I'm picturing Daffy Duck and Bugs Bunny swapping hunting signs on a tree... "Linux season!" "GNU season!", back and forth. The rest of us just watching like Elmer Fud.

[-] ExtravagantEnzyme@lemm.ee 63 points 6 months ago

Stallman's attempt to rename Linux to incorporate the GNU name not happening was frustrating on his end it seems. Everytime someone calls their system a Linux based OS and not GNU/Linux based OS downplays the work he put in. However, Linus's kernel was more elaborate than GNU Hurd, so it was incorporated. It's said Stallman is a visionary, while Linus is a programist. While there's never been any display of tension in a back and forth between them online, it's always seemed to me they appreciate and also despise various aspects of each another.

[-] cbarrick@lemmy.world 81 points 6 months ago

However, Linus's kernel was more elaborate than GNU Hurd, so it was incorporated.

Quite the opposite.

GNU Hurd was a microkernel, using lots of cutting edge research, and necessitating a lot of additional complexity in userspace. This complexity also made it very difficult to get good performance.

Linux, on the other hand, was just a bog standard Unix monolithic kernel. Once they got a libc working on it, most existing Unix userspace, including the GNU userspace, was easy to port.

Linux won because it was simple, not elaborate.

[-] ExtravagantEnzyme@lemm.ee 7 points 6 months ago

Ok, interesting, thanks for the correction. Do you think rephrasing my statement and stating Linus's kernel is more adaptive would be more accurate?

[-] cbarrick@lemmy.world 20 points 6 months ago

Maybe.

Linux won because it worked. Hurd was stuck in research and development hell. They never were able to catch up.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 46 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Everytime someone calls their system a Linux based OS and not GNU/Linux based OS downplays the work he put in.

Absolutely, and the fact that people didn't adopt it creates confusion, some people claim Android is also Linux, which you can argue, but it's definitely NOT GNU/Linux, and it's definitely NOT a free desktop OS as defined by freedesktop.org either. There's a huge difference.
Especially since Android generally means Android with Google apps, and not AOSP. AOSP is open source, but Android with Google apps is not.

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I actually believe that “GNU / Linux” creates the confusion, even the Android problem you cite.

If we all just said “Linux” to mean Linux distribution and the software ecosystem that implies, almost everybody would agree what that meant. All this “actually what you are calling Linux is actually” and “Linux is just the kernel” stuff confuses people. If Linux is just the kernel then Android and Ubuntu are equally Linux. Most people do not even know what a kernel is until you start “educating” people that “Linux” is not Linux.

An Operating System is defined by the applications that it runs natively. Alpine Linux and Ubuntu run the same software and services. Chimera Linux runs all the same stuff even though it comes without any GNU software by default ( BSD utils, Clang compiler, MUSL ). They are all “Linux”. None of them are Android or ChromeOS. They are not the embedded OS in my thermostat or body worn camera. Of course, all these things use the Linux kernel but they are not all “Linux” operating systems.

There are many examples of the kernel not defining the Operating System. iOS and macOS are not the same thing. Windows and Xbox are not the same thing. Yes, us geeks know the common infrastructure they share.

And if an operating system is defined by its applications, is “GNU” a good label? My distro of choice offers 80,000 packages of which maybe 200 are managed by the GNU Project. Go to gnu.org and look at the list of packages that are actually GNU for real. It may shock you how short the list is.

There are other single sources that contribute more software. In terms of code and base architecture, Red Hat is probably the largest contributor ( and no, I do not use Red Hat — RHEL has fewer than 3000 packages for one thing ). I do not want to call my distribution “Red Hat” Linux but frankly it makes more sense than GNU.

Some of the GNU / Linux folks say that the reason for the label is the C library ( Glibc ). But not all Linux distros use Glibc. For a mainstream Linux user, does it make sense to say that Alpine, Void, and Chimera are not the same kind of OS as Ubuntu or Fedora? A regular user could sit down at any of them and not only use them mostly the same but perhaps not even notice the difference. I could write a Linux app without knowing about Alpine and the it could be built for it easily. They all use the same apps and desktop environments. They all run Docker natively. Even fairly deep Linux knowledge applies equally to them all. As pointed out, freedesktop.org applies to them equally. They have the same driver and hardware support ( including the full graphics and audio stacks ). Most people would agree that all these “Linux” systems are pretty alike and quite different from macOS, Windows, and Android. They are all much more like each other than they are even to FreeBSD.

The GNU name pays homage to the historical contribution of the GNU Project that, while important, is pretty historical at this point. If the goal is to promote Free Software or even the GPL, the right branding would be the FSF. So, even that is confusing.

Clearly, in my view, GNU is a terrible brand to try to glob on to Linux. It is not explanatory. It is not even accurate. It is mostly political and frankly overstates the current contribution of the project. I talked code above. There is more code in Wayland or X11 and Mesa than in all of GNU probably. There are more lines of code licensed MIT than GPL in most distros. Most GPL software available is NOT provided by the GNU project.

Again, GNU is a hugely important project to free software and the history of Linux. That history should be celebrated and acknowledged. Distorting it and contorting it is not the way to do that. Enough with “GNU / Linux” already.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SpeakinTelnet@sh.itjust.works 29 points 6 months ago

Should have been called Lignux.

[-] lung@lemmy.world 28 points 6 months ago
[-] Cyber@feddit.uk 4 points 6 months ago
[-] ardorhb@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Thats the term Stallman came up with when the first distributions (esspecially Debian) started to build up. It wasnt really popular even back than so he setteled in GNU/Linux as alternative which to this day is in the name of quit a lot distributions.

It was never the plan/intend to rename the Linux kernel itsself to either of those terms.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Nibodhika@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago

Should we call it X/GNU/Linux as to not downplay the work the people at Xorg put in? Also possibly Systemd/X/GNU/Linux, how about Plasma/Systemd/X/GNU/Linux, and since nowadays browsers do most of the tasks I think it's only fair Firefox/Plasma/Systemd/X/GNU/Linux, or maybe Chromium/GNOME/Dinit/Wayland/Musl/Linux, you know what these two have in common? Just the Kernel, but you would say they're both the same OS.

I'm not saying GNU is not great nor am I saying that they didn't contributed or that they're worthless. But GNU is not special, X, Systemd, and other such components are just as essentials to Linux as GNU, and no one claims they should be added to the name of the OS.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] chemicalwonka@discuss.tchncs.de 50 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Both are equally important for the GNU/Linux world. Torvalds is more inclined to the "tech" side and Stallman is more like a "philosopher" the man who showed us the importance of free software.They are body and soul of the GNU/Linux. Long live to them.

[-] TheImpressiveX@lemmy.ml 47 points 6 months ago

TLDR : Does finnish man like bearded GNU jesus man and the same vice versa

My impression is that they both have a respect for each other, although they don't necessarily like each other.

[-] dactylotheca@suppo.fi 37 points 6 months ago

Neither of them is exactly what I'd call easily likeable

[-] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 12 points 6 months ago

But Linus was very likeable among the computer nerds of his own generation. These eccentricities that are criticized today have actually added a lot to his fame.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 39 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I can't remember having seen them debating each other, either in person or otherwise. But their positions are well known. Linus chose the GPL license from an engineering/pragmatic viewpoint, while Stallman is an idealist.

Apparently they are quite friendly:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDxMJQLXmBE

[-] Tyoda@lemm.ee 6 points 6 months ago

Why does this look and sound like the inspirational scene of a Mockumentary?

load more comments (16 replies)

Lmao, that tldr is fucking GLORIOUS.

[-] lemmyreader@lemmy.ml 17 points 6 months ago
[-] Gutless2615@ttrpg.network 9 points 6 months ago

Stallman is an ass and particularly is an ass to women. Fuck that guy. There’s a reason everyone in tech has a Stallman horror story.

[-] Nibodhika@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago

People downvoting you have never met Stallman face to face.

[-] LeroyJenkins@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

(Linus leans back in his chair, a glint of amusement in his eyes, and gestures toward Richard Stallman who is seated across from him. Richard, ever the passionate advocate, is already gesturing with his hands.)

"Well, if you're talking about the revolution in computing, you can't forget about this fella right here, Mr. Stallman."

(He gives Richard a playful nudge.)

"He's the one who really gave us the framework, the ideals, the whole 'free software' movement."

Richard, his eyes gleaming with conviction, jumps in.

"It's not just about code, Linus. It's about freedom, about users having control over their own technology. It's about sharing, about building on each other's work, and refusing to be locked in by proprietary systems." (He leans forward, his voice gaining intensity.)

"We had to fight for that freedom, against the corporations who wanted to control every bit of software, every line of code. But we won, and GNU is proof that free software can not only work but thrive. "

Linus nods in agreement, a hint of respect in his voice.

"He's right, you know. Without the GNU tools, without Richard's vision, Linux wouldn't be what it is today. It wouldn't be as powerful, as flexible, as truly free."

(He turns back to you, a mischievous glint in his eyes.)

"But don't let them fool you, we weren't always the best of friends. We had our disagreements, our battles over licensing, our philosophical differences. But hey, that's part of the fun, isn't it?"

(He grins, leaning back in his chair.)

"In the end, we were all working towards the same goal, a world where software is free for all to use, share, and improve. And that's a goal worth fighting for, wouldn't you say?"

[-] mholiv@lemmy.world 22 points 6 months ago

This reaks of chatgpt. All the way down to the milktoast ending.

[-] Thomrade@lemm.ee 16 points 6 months ago

It does completely. Also, its "Milquetoast". Milktoast is just soggy bread.

[-] mholiv@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

Ahh. Bone Apple Tea moment.

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 months ago

Omelette du fromage

[-] toastal@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 months ago

Disappointed as I was hoping for some Richard Stallchan x Linus Torvaldsan fanfic

[-] Barzaria@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 months ago

Who is running herd right now? I need to know.

[-] pingveno@lemmy.ml 7 points 6 months ago

I tried Debian/Herd on a spare box. I think that lasted for what, a week? It was a less than complete experience, so I moved on to more fruitful experiments.

[-] myrrh@ttrpg.network 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

...i'm absolutely ignorant of its current state, but every time i've checked in on progress of GNU/hurd over the past three decades, it still hasn't matured into a stable production-ready platform: i'm not sure if that's an artifact of technical viability or developer interest...

[-] pingveno@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 months ago

I wasn't able to get a good read on it either. I didn't spot anything obviously wrong from a technical standpoint, but I'm not a systems developer. It just doesn't have much that distinguishes it on a non-technical level. The design is neat, but other OS projects like Redox have shot past it in a shorter period of time. That tells me something's broken, whether it's technical or social.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
122 points (93.0% liked)

Linux

48655 readers
1532 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS