Live data from Hacker News

GNU/Linux Distribution Timeline

futurist.se

31–40 of 59 posts

Re: GNU/Linux Distribution Timeline

#31
post #25
post #19

What about all the distributions that don't include GNU, or those that only include a tiny proportion of GNU code, is there a chart that includes those?

They don't actually exist - it's just hot air from the anti-GNU crowd.

Android doesn't have glibc, and it's the most popular consumer computing platform.

Re: GNU/Linux Distribution Timeline

#33
post #19

What about all the distributions that don't include GNU, or those that only include a tiny proportion of GNU code, is there a chart that includes those?

The only essential GNU software is GCC, and even GCC can be replaced with Clang for many applications nowadays. Let's not call it GNU/Linux - it's just silly.

Re: GNU/Linux Distribution Timeline

#35

Such a waste of time and manpower creating all these forks. I wish folks spent time scratching their itch by writing great software for Linux instead of trying to reinvent the same wheel. And yet folks will continue to fork platform trying to solve problem that doesn't exist.

Many of the forks weren't/aren't serious anyway and the majority died out pretty soon, they shouldn't be seen as competition or wasted time. If you just want to experiment and don't want to pay attention to some community guidelines etc., then forking is better. It is exactly this freedom I love about Linux or open source in general.

Re: GNU/Linux Distribution Timeline

#36
post #25
post #19

What about all the distributions that don't include GNU, or those that only include a tiny proportion of GNU code, is there a chart that includes those?

They don't actually exist - it's just hot air from the anti-GNU crowd.

I can name one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastodon_Linux

Re: GNU/Linux Distribution Timeline

#39
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You already see some kind of popularity – just count the number of forks.

Forks are also an indicator that people weren't happy with the origin.

Or that people were really happy with the origin..

That's like saying countries that based their "constitutions" off of another countries did it because they don't like that countries constitution. What's more likely is that they really like it but just wanted to tweak something.

Post reply on HN