scalding take
🇳🇱
scalding take
@tuxcrafting Whats a good one? Only gui based coding ive seen has been horrific.
re: scalding take
there have been no serious attempts at making a general-purpose one
re: scalding take
@tuxcrafting Fair argument but even then I'm skeptical. While i couod see the benefit of better visualizations I'd argue text is still the best way to code.
Let me guys your a windows user?
re: scalding take
@tuxcrafting well just compare the speed fo doing something in your terminal vs a gui (the windows way)?
re: scalding take
what i'm talking about is representing programs in a more graphical way
re: scalding take
@tuxcrafting That is likely something I could get behind then.
If you call our operating system “Linux”, that conveys a mistaken idea of the system’s origin, history, and purpose. If you call it “GNU/Linux,” that conveys (though not in detail) an accurate idea.
But does this matter? Is it important whether people know the system’s origin, history, and purpose? Yes, because people who forget history are often condemned to repeat it. The Free World that has developed around GNU/Linux is not secure; the problems that led us to develop GNU are not completely eradicated, and they threaten to come back. When I explain why it’s appropriate to call the operating system “GNU/Linux” rather than “Linux,” people sometimes respond this way:
"Granted that the GNU Project deserves credit for this work, is it really worth a fuss when people don’t give credit? Isn’t the important thing that the job was done, not who did it? You ought to relax, take pride in the job well done, and not worry about the credit."
This would be wise advice, if only the situation were like that—if the job were done and it were time to relax. If only that were true! But challenges abound, and this is no time to take the future for granted. Our community’s strength rests on commitment to freedom and cooperation. Using the name GNU/Linux is a way for people to remind themselves and inform others of these goals.
People who know they are using a system that came out of the GNU Project can see a direct relationship between themselves and GNU. They won’t automatically agree with our philosophy, but at least they will see a reason to think seriously about it. In contrast, people who consider themselves “Linux users,” and believe that the GNU Project “developed tools which proved to be useful in Linux,” typically perceive only an indirect relationship between GNU and themselves. They may just ignore the GNU philosophy when they come across it.
The GNU Project is idealistic, and anyone encouraging idealism today faces a great obstacle: the prevailing ideology encourages people to dismiss idealism as “impractical.” Our idealism has been extremely practical: it is the reason we have a free GNU/Linux operating system. People who love this system ought to know that it is our idealism made real.
If “the job” really were done, if there were nothing at stake except credit, perhaps it would be wiser to let the matter drop. But we are not in that position. To inspire people to do the work that needs to be done, we need to be recognized for what we have already done. Please help us, by calling the operating system GNU/Linux.
I disagree with your leadin that calling it "linux" shows ignorance of the origin. I'd say the opposite, it shows an understanding of the separation between these concepts and means you wish to specify something more general than **just** gnu linux.
As otehrs have mentioned many of us dont run a GNU userland, some of us do. Sometimes we want to be inclusive of all linux, not just GNU/Linux.
Its really no different than specifying Linux as opposed to your distro. You are intentionally be general so as to be inclusive of all the flavors.
Nope, but even if it was and he is just copying it in multiple places, it still is worth countering.
The part you are missing is when people say "I use linux" we arent trying to claim that our operating system is linux, we are only stating that we use the linux kernel and are not being specific about any other details about the operating system, intentionally so.
Even just saying "GNU Linux" would not be an apt description of the operating system you as it says nothing about several components such as package management, which are part of an OS.
So your argument is on a faulty assumption that people are saying "Linux" is intended to be a descriptor of the entire operating system, when it is not.
The vast, overwhelming majority of people saying "Linux" means the whole operating system just as the vast overwhelming majority of people saying "Windows" means the whole operating system.
There might be a tiny percentage of people who say "Linux" instead of "GNU/Linux" with a sort of inclusive intention (to not hurt the feelings of binaries that are not #GNU 🤣), but I'm pretty sure it doesn't reach 1% of all people using the term (or the OS).
So that's not a faulty assumption but a rather reasonable one.
@Shamar
Whether the assumption is reasonable or not isnt what defines if it is faulty. The fact remains in this case the assumption was flat our wrong, and thus faulty.
@r @tuxcrafting @roka
uses GNU make syntax (Just checked with my OpenBSD make and it didn't work). Meaning apline depends on GNU, alpine uses GNU software.
I dont think anyone is denying that GNU didnt make contributions that will show up in any system if you look deep enough.. Thats not really the point.
We simply dont feel there is a need to list all the contributions in our current userland when all we are trying to state is that we are loyal to the kernel itself.
>loyal to the kernel itself
@r yes I am all about the linux kernel and linus, not so much of a GNU fan boy however.
@r No thats not what I said, I support open-source software, I just prefer open source alternatives to the GNU wherever I can.
>I support open-source software
unfortunately your beloved linus torvalds and their linux foundation don't
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/firmware/ti_3410.fw.ihex?h=v4.8
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/firmware/radeon/R600_pfp.bin.ihex?h=v4.8
@r I'm well aware of the fact that binary blobs occur in the kernel,
If you have a better solution like all open source feel free to contribute it.
@r I read it the first time. You seem to think I am somehow against GNU, I am not. I simply do not have lyalty to GNU being on my system.
You seem to be making a lot of assumptions. Not sure why you are upset that someone prefers to say " I use the linux kernel" insisting they should specify their userland too
Long story short I will happily use alternatives to GNU userland, I would not be so happy to use alternatives to the linux kernel. so If i announce what I use proudly, I announce the kernel.
Nothing more nothing less and you are doing some impressive mental gymnastics to make a mountain out of a molehill.
Nothing is wrong with it. I just have no loyalty to using it and am more than happy to use non-GNU replacements on linux. Especially so if they have less-viral licenses, but that isnt really a huge driving factor.
It has less to do wiht me taking issue with the GNU which i dont 9but to listen to "r" you would think I do) and more to do with the fact that my loyalty in terms of the software I use is centered around the linux kernel. Thats the must-have component for me.
GNU is fine its just not the part im going to shout from the roof tops is all. Its not the part of my system I happen to be announcing to others or feel relevant to mention most of the time (unless being asked about my userland)
There are various distros that lack or replace GNU to varying degrees. Andoid pretty much eliminates it completely.
Regardless there are a few distros which have little or no GNU in them.
But the fact that the GNU orginzation contributed some vital parts to the userland is nice and all, but so have thousands of other organizations and people.
Thats why I'm liking going to use one of three terminology, for the sake of percision and because of what information I hope to convey:
1) *nix - I use this just talk about the whole family of POSIX systems
2) Linux - I use this when I want to convey was flavor of kernel I use specifically. This is most common lately since all my systems run linux, not all of them run GNU, so it would be incorrect to say "I only use GNU/Linux" but it would be correct to say "I only use Linux"
3) Archlinux - I use this when I want to specify the entire operating system I use. This will convey the fact that I am using GNU userland, or at least that I am likely to use it, but also convery much of the other non-GNU userland I use. If i want to describe my whole operating system then this is the term I use.
I see little need to specify GNU/Linux which is basically just saying what kernel I use and arbitrarily picking an organization that happened to write a few key userland apps and libraries I use (which ignoring all the other organizations involved). It strikes me as a largely non-descript and pointless phraseology.
It has nothing to do with hating the GNU though or anything like that.
@r I mean hell your lucky I said Linux at all, usually I prefer to say *nix
@r Again that is ignorant to the point I made. I dont see any obligation to mention one among many userland programs. Particularly if they are things I personally wish to see phased out and replaced and do my best to use alternatives
This is really well written.
If anything, the situation today is more precarious than it has been for a long time (or, at least so I gather). Especially worrying is the rise of javascript as a first class citizen for young students. Some smart people I know maintain that the next generation will write all their software in and for chromium. This is one minor permutation away from proprietary software.
These are very real concerns that every developer, and indeed every businessman in tech, should be aware of. The importance of branding, especially as written in this post pointing out that GNU/Linux is a collaborative effort of free software, is easy to grasp. The last time I ran into freemo he also had reading comprehension failures of the sort he displays in this thread. Seeing it again, I suspect he is extracting keywords and then simply reciting talking points, sometimes mixing several of them together (cf. "GNU app"). To freemo, I would suggest that you slow down and digest what you read in depth. Some people take great care to try to craft meaningful messages. Modern social media has a way of causing us to make trivial and disposable what is written, but there is still a place in this world to think deeply about simple things, and to read carefully what someone writes. r is right here. You know very well that the free software movement is the only reason any cloud compute company is solvent. Imagine running a SaaS on a windows server where you pay a license fee per core, with an oracle DB where you need a different license to have more users, etc. The moment we relax, those who support proprietary software will gobble up everything they can again.
Translation: I like RMS political ideology. I dislike Linus Torvalds political ideology. Therefore I get angry when people give more credit to Linus making it looks like Stallman contributions, and therefore hyper idealistic goals, were secondary.
Geez people, you guys have been in that ideological wrestling for the last 30 years. Can you people just stop it already?.
What I said is not incorrect, I said I am running linux, I am. I did not specify what my userland was, it might be GNU it might be something else.
So my statment holds true, it just had limited information itn it.
re: scalding take
re: scalding take