Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?

pedrocr.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 139 posts

Re: How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?

#71

Post by pedrocr »

veyron wrote: post #42

Why wasn't the kernel part separated from the support stuff? It would seem the correct division (based on article) is 6% kernel 3% kernel support (i guess it would fall in "other")

There's a line there somewhere. Clearly udev is very tightly linked to the kernel and it was built to replace devfs which was inside the kernel. On the other extreme maybe the filesystem programs (e.g., reiserfsprogs or xfsprogs) aren't as tight a coupling and would make sense outside. I put the split into the footnote to make that clearer.

Re: How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?

#72

Post by zbowling »

tzs wrote: post #61
zohebv wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looked at the article and it seems to strengthen the argument for calling it a GNU/Linux distribution. The top contributors as per the chart. 1. kernel 9% 2. gnu 8% 3. kde 8% 4,5 java, mozilla 6% 6. gnome 3% If you combine gnu with gnome, we have 1. gnu 13% 2. kernel 9% Also considering that java/mozilla are platform agnostic, the candidate names we have are linux-gnu-kde OR gnu-linux(-kde) If you are not running K…

It's all irrelevant because operating systems in general are NOT named after their prominent components. It does often happen that the kernel and the OS have the same name, but that is not because the OS is named after the kernel but rather the other way around--that is, the creators of the OS name the OS, and then the kernel is known as the X-kernel, where X is the name of the OS. If I choose to take the Linux kerne…

Well yes. Debian, Ubuntu, SuSE, etc are the names of the OS distributions.

When I'm generalizing based on the stack people expect, I usually say Linux when I mean the common Glibc, GCC (maybe CLang), and GNU utils with a Linux kernel setup people expect to find normally (and I'm usually excluding Android saying that), or I say that it's UNIX variant when I want to include Mac and BSD or any other generic POSIX complaint OS.

It's like Pop vs Soda vs Coke. I prefer to call everything Coke. http://www.popvssoda.com/

Re: How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?

#73

Post by FlowerPower »

LinesOfCode to determine how much "GNU" there is is like counting number of screws in a car to determine how much "car" it is.

Without GCC to compile the kernel and all the other tools, there would be no kernel. A free open source compiler which has existed for decades now, and its competition, Clang, is it even stable yet?

Re: How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?

#74

Post by prodigal_erik »

hasenj wrote: post #66
bxr wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the whole idea of a Free alternative to Unix I don't mean to marginalize the gnu project, but there were already free -nixes out there. Starting over from scratch isn't much of an accomplishment other than the license... >and created the culture and licenses that made it possible The GPL has ultimately done more harm than good for open source. The only time proprietary software vendors are forced to release anything…

> there were already free -nixes out there Not true, the various "Free" BSDs came much later. As far as I know, BSD existed but wasn't Free. If it was already free, then RMS would probably not have launched the GNU project.

I think he still would have, because what he set out to create is a 100% copylefted system. It's in the manifesto:

> Everyone will be permitted to modify and redistribute GNU, but no distributor will be allowed to restrict its further redistribution. That is to say, proprietary modifications will not be allowed. I want to make sure that all versions of GNU remain free.

Re: How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?

#75

Post by davidhollander »

bxr wrote: post #57
foob wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just so you know, GNOME stands for GNU Object Model Environment. Not that that negates your point, but I still disagree with you for other reasons. Firefox is in no way part of the operating system itself. I would argue that Bash and the core-utils on the other hand are. Also keep in mind that the GNU Project created the whole idea of a Free alternative to Unix and created the culture and licenses that made it possib…

>the whole idea of a Free alternative to Unix I don't mean to marginalize the gnu project, but there were already free -nixes out there. Starting over from scratch isn't much of an accomplishment other than the license... >and created the culture and licenses that made it possible The GPL has ultimately done more harm than good for open source. The only time proprietary software vendors are forced to release anything…

>The GPL has ultimately done more harm than good for open source.

This claim seems to defy the simplest explanation given the historical success of linux, so I think you need to be a bit more rigorous in substantiating your argument.

I'll agree that strictly enforcing 'giving back' is an unnecessary imposition and cost for adopters when a) there are many similar substitutable goods b) open source has momentum: evidence exists that giving back can be positive and in the adopters' interest.

However, neither of those were the case in the era when the GPL was born. The GPL should at least be given credit for helping bootstrap the present state of open source.

Re: How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?

#77

Post by EdiX »

zohebv wrote: post #44
cookiecaper wrote: post #9

FSF's insistence on "GNU/Linux" has always been childish, but now it's just silly really. For years the proportion of GNU software that actually gets run has been dwarfed by the code from Mozilla, KDE and/or GNOME, and other major desktop software vendors. The GNU/Linux argument has never been persuasive and I'd say it's high time they let it go.

I looked at the article and it seems to strengthen the argument for calling it a GNU/Linux distribution. The top contributors as per the chart. 1. kernel 9% 2. gnu 8% 3. kde 8% 4,5 java, mozilla 6% 6. gnome 3% If you combine gnu with gnome, we have 1. gnu 13% 2. kernel 9% Also considering that java/mozilla are platform agnostic, the candidate names we have are linux-gnu-kde OR gnu-linux(-kde) If you are not running K…

    A better argument would be that only a fraction of GNU software is active at any moment, so by percentage of GNU v/s kernel code executed in any given time interval.
A lot of programs link to glibc.

Re: How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?

#78

Post by omouse »

bxr wrote: post #57
foob wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just so you know, GNOME stands for GNU Object Model Environment. Not that that negates your point, but I still disagree with you for other reasons. Firefox is in no way part of the operating system itself. I would argue that Bash and the core-utils on the other hand are. Also keep in mind that the GNU Project created the whole idea of a Free alternative to Unix and created the culture and licenses that made it possib…

>the whole idea of a Free alternative to Unix I don't mean to marginalize the gnu project, but there were already free -nixes out there. Starting over from scratch isn't much of an accomplishment other than the license... >and created the culture and licenses that made it possible The GPL has ultimately done more harm than good for open source. The only time proprietary software vendors are forced to release anything…

The GPL has ultimately done more harm than good for open source

That's the point. The GPL is for free software.

Scared of what codebase? I'm more scared of proprietary software than anything because who knows wtf it's doing.

Re: How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?

#79

Post by omouse »

lawfulfalafel wrote: post #60

Okay, how about this: build a Linux distribution using no GNU software. If you don't think it's critical, try to get by without it. RMS is a good guy, and I think that his effort to make foundational efforts remembered is equally laudable.

I wanted to say that Haiku OS has done it but then again...I'm sure they use some GNU code somewhere.

Re: How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?

#80

Post by pedrocr »

ianloic wrote: post #76

Comparing the size of Ubuntu 'main' isn't interesting. A more thoughtful assessment would have examined what packages were installed & used rather than which ones existed. That data is really easy to find: http://popcon.ubuntu.com/

I do have that data and have been using it in these kinds of analysis. There are two big problems with it. The first is that it's not given out in any kind of time-series or by distro-version so some analysis are very hard to do (this one would work though). The second is that the data gathering is opt-in so the sample will have a bias, probably towards power users.
Post reply on HN