All of the writers are complete fuckwits who are unable to comprehend anything beyond "this linuc use gnome" or "this linuc rolling release".
Direct quote from one of their article's headlines
Let's look at the website itself
Fucking hell. I hope Linus Torvalds isn't too involved in that shithole even though the Linux Foundation manages it.
Linux.com in its current state is an abomination
All of the writers are complete fuckwits who are unable to comprehend anything beyond "this linuc use gnome" or "this linuc rolling release".
Other urls found in this thread:
I'd say it's omgububtu tier, but
actually rustles my jimmies.
Oh shit nigga what the fuck are you doing? Did the domain confuse you or something? The real Linux publication is LWN. Be sure to subscribe, they deserve the money.
It is an operating system.
I wonder what OP expected. The linux/distro media market is the rick and morty audience.
These are the people who think Archlinux teaches you about computahs.
Linux is a kernel; a program in a system.
This, even Torvalds calls it that: github.com
It's just B$D corporate servants that want people to not think about freedom.
go back to redhat
Nope. It's an operating system. The GNU shit is only there to make it feel like an Unix one. You can have a GNU Linux distribution, not an OS.
--- Linus Torvalds
Linux Weekly News most definitely does. It's been publishing ridiculously detailed articles for decades.
Debian calls it Debian GNU/Linux.
It uses GNU packages so it makes sense. They can call it whatever they want. Doesn't stop a program from using the operating system interface directly without invoking even a single line of GNU code.
Now I know you are just bating.
In computing, a system call is the programmatic way in which a computer program requests a service from the kernel of the operating system it is executed on.
Nobody is calling Linux as GNU Linux. Linus is making a strawman here.
Yes. The kernel is the operating system. Whenever we talk about systems programming, we're talking about using that interface as opposed to a bunch of wrapper programs in shell scripts. GNU provides the latter, and it's been failing to provide an actual operating system (which is actual tough work) for decades now. They're so mad about it they keep trying to redefine things based on POSIX definitions of an opersting system nobody really cares about. It's POSIX that defines an OS as "having a shell and utilities like cp and ls", nobody else cares.
You're wrong. GNU has had a working kernel program since 2001. GNU has had an operating system since 1983 when GNU was born.
What, Hurd? My sides.
Yeah, it's easy to convince yourself you have one when you can just decide what the meaning of an operating system is.
I use Arch because of the AUR, most up to date packages of any distro and speed of pacman, but the community is the absolute fucking worse.
Of course. Stallman has been writing operating systems since the beginning of operating systems!
PS. GNU Hurd is not an OS kernel and has never intended to be an OS kernel.
This entire thread is why Windows is still winning.
because criticizing a website = linuc fail rite?
No one cares arch fag. You are contributing to 1 of the many things that makes the arch community terrible.
You are literally the exact cancer you claim to dislike.
I'm not him but stop being autistic. The guy he quoted said people run Arch to "learn Linux" and he provided a counter-point by saying he uses Arch because of the packages. There's nothing wrong with what he said.
You're just a triggered faggot who feels the need to shitpost every time people mention Arch.
Ridiculous. It is irrelevant to mention that you use arch. Instead it could be stated that the """good""" thing about arch is the aur, but that he agrees that the community is cancer.
Have fun implementing all the binutils yourself.
I bet you call Legos (((LEGO® Brand Interlocking Building Toys™))). How far did you shove that stick into the gaping wound you try to call a vagina?
WHOEVER THOUGHT POPUPS WAS A GOOD IDEA WAS A NIGGER
Same with trackers and botnet
Same with retards who think xfce is anything worth existing
Linux confirmed nigger-tier
I actually do. Lego is the name of the brand while toy bricks is the product that they produce.
Linus Torvalds is a piece of shit.
How does it feel to suck corporate cock?
I'm enjoying myself, yeah. It's easier than you think. GNU source code is pure garbage because it has to support 15 million architectures and operating systems nobody cares about. When you start to actually use the Linux operating system, things become so much easier.
Also, there's no law that says Linux functionality must be exposed as some legacy coreutils package. You can just as easily build a graphical environment that uses the system calls directly -- no need to wrap shell scripts like an autist. You can also build a programming language on top of Linux and create your own user space on top of it.
See what I mean about Linux being the operating system? GNU can and will disappear someday while Linux will live on and will continue to power a ridiculous amount of applications.
Please. Linux needs no donations, it's the most successful open source project ever created. It's the FSF and it's pollitically charged projects that are dead outisde the GNU bubble precisely because they alienated everyone.
I'm not the one conflating a company to an everyday item. I don't call facial tissues as "Kleenex" and I don't call photocopy machines as "Xerox".
If you're not causing a trademark to become genericized, you're not using language correctly.
Linux, the kernel, is not an operating system, but rather a kernel. If you were to run Linux, the kernel, as an operating system you will be greeted by:
You can pass literally ANY program in place of the init system, including bash. Just because most programs don't know how to mount procfs/sysfs and spawn some services doesn''t mean they can't be programmed to.
That's right. It is also the case that in actual practice, when people use the Linux kernel program, they pair it with the GNU OS or the Android OS. If your system doesn't rely upon GNU to operate, then your system is not GNU/Linux system. This is actually the point: the GNU/Linux name is only intended for systems that rely on Linux and GNU as the fundamental system.
No, you are.
That's quite literally what Linux does.
Linux does that but it is incomplete as an operating system so it isn't an operating system by itself.
The point is Linux is the operating system while the GNU shit is just a bunch of utilities that make it look like Unix. It's useful because people are used to Unix. Obviously if people make a completely new user space it will cease to be Linux + GNU and become Linux + whatever. Therefore, Linux is the operating system while GNU is the user space libraries and shell utilities provided by a Linux distribution. Calling GNU an OS with Linux as its kernel is not just wrong, it's retarded.
How hard is this to accept?
Linux is one of the most complete operating systems in existence. It quite literally does anything and everything you can possibly want.
The point is Linux is the kernel program and one part of the operating system while GNU is the operating system which is made up of a bunch of utilities to make it look like Unix. Therefore Linux is a kernel program which is not an operating system by itself.
See this proves my point that Linux, the kernel, is not an operating system, but merely just a kernel.
but for it to be considered an operating system it must also expose functionality to the user for operating the system itself.
=It literally says the services are provided for programs you dense retard. The user can choose whatever programs he wants.=
What is the Unix operating system?
Provided for programs, but not the user. If you add a program to be able to operate your computer, it becomes part of your operating system.
Just because POSIX says kernel isn't an OS doesn't mean it's true. Learn computer science.
not an argument
Kill yourself brainlet.
Says the person with the inaccurate definition of what an operating system is.
This thread is proof of why we need plan 9.
Install a pure kernel on hardware and tell me how using that as your daily driver works out for you.
Literally no academic will call a kernel an operating system. They MAY call it a piece of an operating system though.
I easily can. Alpine Linux uses Busybox, or use OpenBSD.
I fell for the meme once too
So when are you going to kill yourself?
A lot of embedded devices use extremely minimal Linux installations.
lol get a vm ya pleb
yolinux.com is dope amirite
A kernel is part of an operating system. I can guarantee the osdev wiki is not calling Linux an entire operating system in itself.
No embedded device uses the Linux kernel by itself, they'll have busybox or some minimal operating system
Obviously he meant GNU/Linux. You're the one making a strawman here.
Since when is xfce not lightweight?
This is pathetic.
Sure, but then it's not GNU. Also, whatever application they wrote could have performed the system calls itself. It has access to the full OS functionality.
It's different when your OS is tightly coupled with user space programs. Windows for example doesn't really work without its GUI stuff; there's UAC code coupled to the kernel; the NT interface is private and unstable and even changes between releases.
Go back to sucking that corporate cock you illiterate retard.
Linux Kernel Development, by Robert Love - a very decent 'overview' book of the Linux kernel. It doesn't go into too much detail, but provides enough of a big picture and detail view to really get started on a Linux kernel project. Understanding the Linux Kernel, David Bovet - more detailed than Linux Kernel Development. If you want to do more work than browsing the kernel, this has more of the detail required.
These are their references.
Also nice strawman, nobody claims that there are no operating systems that use Linux for the kernel program that are not a GNU operating system. The most popular one being the Android OS, it is noteworthy that all GNU copyleft components where removed in order to allow for a proprietary userspace that spies on the user and denies him control of his computing.
For which they used BSD licenses of course, so they can use cuck's software in their proprietary products. Allowing proprietary forks is the sole purpose of permissive licenses.
Yeah, you're starting to understand.
Contrary to what you faggots believe, the 'operating' in operating system doesn't refer to you, it refers to the software. It's the operating system that operates the machine, not you. You just talk to it and ask it to do the shit.
That's exactly what Linux does, and all GNU, busybox or whatever userspace android uses does: talk to the operating system to get it to do things.
Don't turn this into a license war, retards.
A kernel is one piece of an operating system. Not the operating system. Look at almost literally anything and it will say this.
You can sell GPL software. You just can't violate your freedoms.
You are confused. You are thinking about what a kernel is. An operating system pairs a kernel with user facing software for him to operate his computer.
Good luck making any money off of it when its freely copy-able with no repercussions. Very cucked vs selling proprietary.
agreed dunno wtf that guy is talking about
So is any over computer application. If people really want something they can download it from someone else. Just in that case, they don't have the source nor the freedoms.
The difference is one is illegal
If you have access to the source DRM is useless. Proprietary code can have DRM.
DAADs are going to make the AUR less of a selling point in the near future. It'll be interesting to see if Arch will be able to stand on its own after that.
Explain yourself. How is that relevant to anything.
DAAD = "Distro Agnostic Application Distribution"
Basically, AppImage, Flatpak and/or Snap are going to end up making a distro agnostic AUR at some point.
If you mean the Krita flatpak, it has the same themes packed into it as the AppImage. It just defaults to the lighter one for some reason.
Cool does it work with musl? Alternatively does it require glibc. If it does it isn't 'distro' agnostic.
Does the AUR work with musl?
How many distros use musl though? As long as it's not tied to any Gnome or Canonical shit, that's good enough for me.
My favourite one. Along with void, Alpine, gentoo(optionally).
You tell me. I haven't used arch in ages but from what I remember the aur was horribly insecure.
So, boutique distros then. Should these things also support alternative kernels/userlands? Would you not be happy until they ran on the BSDs too?
Shouldn't suprise me considering they are solving a problem that was solved with static linking before some retards (ulrich drepper being one of them) decided that static linking is wrong.
Nigger, you're the one who decided to ditch the GNU in GNU/Linux. As long as these thing run on most 'standard' GNU+Kernel OSes, they live up to the name.
Society is the one conflating company names with the product, faggot. The only people who legitimately object to brand names being turned into the generic name for the items are trademark lawyers and corporate cucks like you.
So how is that going to work on all distros if half of them use different formats for their binaries? Are you just going to have to hope someone makes a compatibility package for your distro?
It's not going to work at all. The only reason distributions exist is to provide binary compatibility with packages. It boggles the mind how people think they can solve problems such as the presence or abscence of versioned symbols with a file format.
When I sell my GPL software, I always sell it for a profit. If it costs me $20000 to develop my software, then I will not sell it for anything less than $20000.
Thoughts on this?
What about ditching the systemd in systemd/gnu.
I fucking hate anything GNU. Fuck you all calling it GNU/Linux.
The only DAAD with systemd as a dependency is Snap, ironically. Flatpak and AppImage don't need it.
glibc is the only GNU package I have a problem with. They break shit constantly in it.
These things already make life easier for sticking to LTS releases.
And then you get mad because they ask for equal credit - while Linux and Open Source activly destroy, lobby, shill blobbed "open source aka look but don't touch" software companies and divide the community.
Look at this:
Pic related. And then they shill crap like skype and ask people not to use the gpl
Why would Linux backstab like that? Look at the members:
And have some final words from Linus Torvalds.
Think again for which team you play and why you would exclude and hate people who fight for you, just because you're triggered by an interjection.
Come on, really?
Even then he still knew it was an operating system:
He also states the obvious:
The lernel will operate the machine and provide its functionality to you via system calls and other interfaces. Without a program to use that interface, it will just idle.
Even the part you quoted admits the posssibility that you may not actually run GNU on top of Linux, it just happens to be the most popular. He said "to get a working system" not "to get an operating system".
The fact is your system is made out of lots of software because it's a convenient design, but if you were to make a huge monolithic binary that ran as PID 1 and cloned itself for concurrency it'd also work because Linux is an operating system that supports whatever's thrown on top of it.
Nah, Linus is right. If RMS had gotten his way, companies would not have shpported Linux and it would have become a second Hurd. It's a good thing Linus isn't an autist like RMS.