• laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I still don’t get why a toolchain that can be replaced but never was able to make a stable kernel of its own after twenty years should get top billing in the name of the OS. A lot of that stuff was left in the dust, its relevance to the system grows smaller each year while the Linux kernel is the only reason they were ever able to make a complete OS in the first place.

    Hardly anyone uses GNU without Linux; way more people use Linux without GNU than with it.

    Plus, the community at large has decided long ago that the name is just Linux… Does it matter that that’s the name of the kernel? No. Windows and MacOS aren’t named after their kernels, or their toolchains, or any other component.

    Anyway, there wasn’t an OS until there was Linux to bring it all together.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Linus is the one who got a workable thing out in the public’s hands. He didn’t even want to name it Linux, but someone came up with that name and it stuck.

      The GNU project did a lot of great things, but ultimately they weren’t able to get a full-fledged operating system out that people could use, so they lost the opportunity to name it. It really shouldn’t matter to them though. GNU is well known, its philosophies are critical to how the free software and open source communities work, it was basically a massive success in the way almost no other volunteer non-commercial projects ever are.

      But tagging “GNU/” in front of Linux is dumb.