Active Topics
-
Porting apps to Leste (32)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Arno_11 - 4 hrs, 3 mins ago -
[ANNOUNCE] CSSU-thumb thread - stable Thumb2 on N900 (2,264)
to Maemo 5 / Fremantle by panjgoori - 1 day, 22 hrs ago -
Full linux distros on Sailfish OS (254)
to SailfishOS by qoh - 2 days, 20 hrs ago - more...
 |
|
2011-02-20
, 16:17
|
|
Posts: 226 |
Thanked: 59 times |
Joined on Sep 2010
@ Mierlo, Netherlands
|
#22
|
Originally Posted by Alex Atkin UK
I personally don't like their ideas very much, but it's stupid to call the OS Linux anyway... Well, if it's a shortcut, it's OK, but from what you wrote, I think you don't realize what important things GNU has done...
Its only wrong if you are coming from the GNU side, for everyone else its perfectly viable. The fact there is such a big debate what is the right way to refer to Linux is proof enough to me that there is no wrong/right way, its just the GNU folks spitting their dummies out because want the recognition for making Linux what it is today. I'm not saying they do not deserve that recognition, but if its at the cost of confusing the end-users and as such stifling the use of Linux by novices, they are just hurting themselves in the long run.
By their logic Ubuntu is GNU/Linux but Maemo or DD-WRT is not, because they are using BusyBox and so the core OS may not be using GNU at all. Exactly how much GNU codebase do we need to be running to call it GNU/Linux? What should we call Maemo and DD-WRT? By branding them all as Linux you get the point across, that they are for all intents are purposes the same tools, even if the underlying code might be from different sources. The end user doesn't need to know if they are using GNU coreutils or not and in fact it just confuses them. Do we really want to get back to the confusion of the DOS ages? That won't help anyone.
I mean just think, its perfectly possible to start off with a none-GNU Linux (is Maemo an example of this?) and then turn it into GNU/Linux by installing the GNU coreutils, etc. That is just plain confusing and should not mean you suddenly have to refer to your distribution differently unless its specifically relevant to a problem you are having. If that is the "right" way to do things, I am happy to be doing it wrong.
The OS you are probably using, and I am using on my PC, N900 and servers I work on, is GNU. For me I can say Debian, which means Debian GNU/(Linux OR kFreeBSD OR whatever the kernel is).
Right now, developers are doing most stuff, so we can't say all packages are for GNU, but think of all the licenses... Where does GPL come from?
Saying Linux is not right... If you know that it's a shortcut, it's cool... But people are starting to forget what the OS they are using is, and that's bad...
I'm also against saying something like Debian GNU.. That's totally wrong, because you are not mentioning the kernel, which plays a very important role.
Maemo is based on the standard gcc library.
If you like to say Linux, do so, but personally I'd like to let people whom I think deserve it, know about the fact that it's GNU/Linux, not Linux.
Think of it as a Maemo-guy, giving info to another Maemo-guy.
__________________
AMLJ**0-1-47
AMLJ**0-1-47
Last edited by AMLJ; 2011-02-20 at 16:22.
 |
|
2011-02-20
, 16:37
|
|
Posts: 1,986 |
Thanked: 7,698 times |
Joined on Dec 2010
@ Dayton, Ohio
|
#23
|
Originally Posted by AMLJ
Well, yeah, Linux is the kernel. Just like X11 is the display system, or vi (or emacs) is the editor. GNU is not a piece of software, it is an organization; stamping GNU onto the name "Linux" is more of a subtle piece of political spin, and I just don't like it.
Well, it's wrong, and that's the reason some Debian users don't like it. Linux is the kernel, not the OS... Debian gives you an option of using GNU/kFreeBSD too, although I prefer Linux to to its better development, and better hardware support.
Linus Torvalds put together his little operating system on his own time with his own effort, and then just released it into the wild and let people play with it. At the time, the BSD guys were trying to maintain their fork of Unix by keeping total control over the code within a small group of developers, and the GNU group were trying to dump Unix and come up with an entirely new kernel of their own. Andy Tannenbaum had produced Minix and pretty much allowed anyone to use it, but only under a very restrictive education-only license. So there were many different kernels floating around out there.
And that's the funny thing; you're entirely right, since then Linux has had better development, and better hardware support. Most designers of both free and commercial software seemed to assume that it was necessary to keep an iron grip over the code; but it was Linus' much more free version of freedom that won the day. Ultimately, the open source movement truly coalesced around Torvalds and the Linux kernel, not Stallman and the various GNU-related utilities.
Anyway, these are ancient political battles.
It probably doesn't matter what people use to name these products today, but I'm old enough to feel annoyed that the GNU guys are still trying to claim ownership over Linux...
|
|
2011-02-20
, 16:44
|
|
Posts: 226 |
Thanked: 59 times |
Joined on Sep 2010
@ Mierlo, Netherlands
|
#24
|
Originally Posted by Copernicus
Linux didn't make an OS... He just made the kernel.. A tiny piece of code, which can do very little without the OS.
Well, yeah, Linux is the kernel. Just like X11 is the display system, or vi (or emacs) is the editor. GNU is not a piece of software, it is an organization; stamping GNU onto the name "Linux" is more of a subtle piece of political spin, and I just don't like it.
Linus Torvalds put together his little operating system on his own time with his own effort, and then just released it into the wild and let people play with it. At the time, the BSD guys were trying to maintain their fork of Unix by keeping total control over the code within a small group of developers, and the GNU group were trying to dump Unix and come up with an entirely new kernel of their own. Andy Tannenbaum had produced Minix and pretty much allowed anyone to use it, but only under a very restrictive education-only license. So there were many different kernels floating around out there.
And that's the funny thing; you're entirely right, since then Linux has had better development, and better hardware support. Most designers of both free and commercial software seemed to assume that it was necessary to keep an iron grip over the code; but it was Linus' much more free version of freedom that won the day. Ultimately, the open source movement truly coalesced around Torvalds and the Linux kernel, not Stallman and the various GNU-related utilities.
Anyway, these are ancient political battles.
Same is on GNU's side... They made a big, but useless OS...
Combination of 'em, makes a powerful thing.
Anyhow, I just care about what is right, and as long as I'm using my Debian Squeeze with Linux kernel, I'll use one of the following to address it:
Debian
Debian GNU/Linux
If I ever decide to use the BSD kernel, which I don't like very much, I'll address it using one of the following names:
Debian
Debian GNU/kFreeBSD
Have fun guys!
__________________
AMLJ**0-1-47
AMLJ**0-1-47
|
|
2011-02-20
, 17:36
|
|
Posts: 71 |
Thanked: 19 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#25
|
GNU tool provide standard command for command line use.
BusyBox provides simplified versions of the utilities and usually have same command but not have enough command option(switch) .
BusyBox provides simplified versions of the utilities and usually have same command but not have enough command option(switch) .
|
|
2011-02-20
, 17:58
|
|
Posts: 1,341 |
Thanked: 708 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
|
#26
|
Originally Posted by AMLJ
As I said stubbornness.
Debian doesn't need to do what is standard... It was one of the first 3 distros which were made, and which are bases of GNU/Linux.
Right now, it is still the most secure, most stable, and the most reasonably-free distro.
"Doesn't need to follow standards because we were first."
That kind of attitude will keep MS Windows strong in home desktop and game scene always. Linux-distributions differentiate too much on wrong things, like non following standards for childish reasons, which wouldn't even matter cosmetically to normal end user.
 |
|
2011-02-21
, 08:40
|
|
Posts: 566 |
Thanked: 282 times |
Joined on Sep 2010
@ Lower Saxony
|
#27
|
Please guys, I just want a linux box for the Maemo SDK/CC. No need to start the old "which distro is better" war over this again.
If Nokia provides ready made ubuntu distro, then I'll use that.
My main box is Windows and unfortunatly has to stay so for work related reasons. (Work specific software)
Thanks for all the useful replies.
If Nokia provides ready made ubuntu distro, then I'll use that.
My main box is Windows and unfortunatly has to stay so for work related reasons. (Work specific software)
Thanks for all the useful replies.
 |
|
2011-02-22
, 10:01
|
|
Posts: 302 |
Thanked: 193 times |
Joined on Oct 2008
@ England
|
#28
|
If anyone ever said to me "I think you mean GNU plus Linux" and they were actually serious, I would have to laugh hard in their face. I've been using it exclusively for five years on every computer I own and a lot of my job is based on it but honestly. That's pathetic.
Also OP. Install gentoo. I wouldn't dream of anything else. Except maybe the BSD's and one day I'd like to give slackware a spin.
Don't listen to them trolling about legacy RPM's
viva la ports
Also OP. Install gentoo. I wouldn't dream of anything else. Except maybe the BSD's and one day I'd like to give slackware a spin.
Don't listen to them trolling about legacy RPM's
viva la ports
|
|
2011-02-22
, 16:55
|
|
Posts: 248 |
Thanked: 191 times |
Joined on May 2010
@ New Zealand
|
#29
|
Originally Posted by casketizer
I'm not aware Nokia provides an ubuntu distro - but the install procedures here apply to debian and ubuntu.
Please guys, I just want a linux box for the Maemo SDK/CC. No need to start the old "which distro is better" war over this again.
If Nokia provides ready made ubuntu distro, then I'll use that.
My main box is Windows and unfortunatly has to stay so for work related reasons. (Work specific software)
Thanks for all the useful replies.
Can you feedback how it went for you. I followed the procedures here for ubuntu, and it threw up quite a few errors, warned me of unverified downloads, and comments about being 'haxored'. I'm going to try it again on my debian box to see what happens.
Tks,
Mish.
Last edited by mishmich; 2011-02-22 at 16:56. Reason: correction
|
|
2011-02-22
, 21:38
|
|
Posts: 566 |
Thanked: 282 times |
Joined on Sep 2010
@ Lower Saxony
|
#30
|
The link to the ubuntu images by Nokia is at the bottom of page 1.
EDIT:
Meh crap they are virtual images....
Gonna install normal ubuntu then. Or debian. Will decide tmrw...
Last edited by casketizer; 2011-02-22 at 21:45.
EDIT:
Meh crap they are virtual images....
Gonna install normal ubuntu then. Or debian. Will decide tmrw...
Last edited by casketizer; 2011-02-22 at 21:45.
I just used the GUI installer on my Fedora and it worked very well. Note that SELinux must be disabled before installing the SDK but can be reenabled afterwards.
You should follow me on Twitter!
Apps: Puzzle Master, IRC Chatter for Harmattan, IRC for Sailfish