- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/5592397
Forty years ago, Richard Stallman announced the plan to develop the GNU operating system, which would be entirely composed of free software. The existence of a free operating system would enable people to operate their computers in freedom, throwing off the power of the developers of nonfree software. The GNU Project has also built the global free software movement.
You must log in or register to comment.
Is this the year of the Hurd desktop?
can’t even get a de working with the current debian builds lmao
love the name cause every time I think its gotta be a joke. Like did they name it after Lief Erikson day
(spongebob reference for the uninitiated)
An anniversary is always gnu
GNU world order
Forty years ago, Richard Stallman announced the plan to develop the GNU operating system
40 years ago and their “OS” still misses the most important part of an OS being an OS. I love how they pretend that the GNU tools are somehow an OS.
Edit: To quote the great Linus Torvalds:
In short: just say NO TO DRUGS, and maybe you won’t end up like the Hurd people.
There’s no need for that, we’re all on the same side, and the GNU tools may not be an os by themselves, but they are a crucial part of any Linux distribution.
Are we? I personally consider RMS a lunatic who’s salty that no one considers his set of tools an operating system. Don’t get me wrong, they did a lot of good, but every time they mention that GNU is an OS I cringe a little inside.
Well, a “set of tools” is not any more or less an operating system than a kernel by itself is, yet not only do Linux fans insist on their kernel being an OS, but that RMS’s “set of tools” is somehow part of “Linux the operating system.” If he’s “salty” about anything it’s probably his life’s work being attributed to someone else who doesn’t even share his philosophy, which I think is understandable.
If you want to be really pedantic, like me, you can note that the Linux-libre variant of Linux is an official GNU project, so you can say that there is an official GNU kernel.
Regardless, I would say the most important contribution of the GNU project is the GNU General Public License, moreso than any specific tool or “set of tools.”
I think youre mixing up importance with being everything, gnu is insanely important and has had a lot of positive effects - but that doesn’t make it my second wife any more than it makes it an OS. its a software foundation at the end of the day.
This even includes the linux-libre, its not all of gnu like all of gnu isn’t an os, one could extend the same idea to the KDE foundation too
Arguably neither GNU utils or the Linux kernel are OSs since they don’t operate anything on their own. They more accurately parts of system. I think distros are more accurately called OSs
Forty years ago, Richard Stallman announced the plan to develop the GNU operating system
This is completely true. The GNU Project’s plan was to build an operating system in 1983, and they intended to call it GNU. The fact that they didn’t build every tool for the operating system doesn’t change their goal or the work they put into it. We have GNU Guix now, an operating system “entirely composed of free software”, so mission accomplished?
I would dispute that the kernel is “the most important part of an OS.” It certainly is an important part - but it does nothing by itself, and a user cannot do anything with it.
Anyway, the reason Hurd isn’t a priority anymore is because we have Linux (well, more specifically, Linux-libre). There’s no need to reinvent something that is already available in the free software world.
