EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

05.13.18

Debunking the Usual Omission of GNU

Posted in GNU/Linux at 12:56 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Pack of gnu in the wild

Summary: Debunking the Usual Omission of GNU — a reader’s debunking of a new article from Linux Journal

THIS guest post from “figosdev” is case insensitive — a choice of style. But it’s the arguments that count.


I know, it’s never going to change.
And it doesn’t really have to.
A tired rebuttal to a tired old farce.
Because why not?
If this gets more time, might as well respond…

Debunking yet another tired “let’s just call it Linux” article that makes a lot out of agreeing with itself

 

Some may remember that the Linux naming convention was a controversy that raged from the late 1990s until about the end of the first decade of the 21st century. Back then, if you called it “Linux”, the GNU/Linux crowd was sure to start a flame war with accusations that the GNU Project wasn’t being given due credit for its contribution to the OS. And if you called it “GNU/Linux”, accusations were made about political correctness, although operating systems are pretty much apolitical by nature as far as I can tell.

a controversy that raged from the late 1990s until about the end of the first decade of the 21st century.

the controversy was probably mostly people saying “you should call it gnu/linux, because we have called it gnu for years and you added a kernel and called the whole thing ‘linux’”

the GNU/Linux crowd was sure to start a flame war with accusations that the GNU Project wasn’t being given due credit

if it was a company with a monopoly, they probably just would have filed a lawsuit. but instead they had an ongoing debate. lets make this debate sound as unreasonable as possible, because then we win by ad hom.

The brouhaha got started in the mid-1990s when Richard Stallman, among other things the founder of the Free Software Movement who penned the General Public License, began insisting on using the term “GNU/Linux” in recognition of the importance of the GNU Project to the OS. GNU was started by Stallman as an effort to build a free-in-every-way operating system based on the still-not-ready-for-prime-time Hurd microkernel.

GNU was started by Stallman as an effort to build a free-in-every-way operating system based on the still-not-ready-for-prime-time Hurd microkernel.

 

the emphasis on the hurd kernel is entirely on the part of the linux crowd. the purpose of the gnu project is and was to make users free. linux doesnt care about that, but its a very good kernel, so stallman suggested sharing credit. and he kept suggesting it– for years, as linux grew and continued to accept all the credit.

According to this take, Linux was merely the kernel, and GNU software was the sauce that made Linux work.

to the gnu project, hurd is just a kernel. and linux is just a kernel. it makes no sense to gnu developers to use the entire project and name it after the kernel–

the cpu is a very core part of the computer, but if you took a laptop designed to make the user free and changed the intel processor to an amd one, you wouldnt call the laptop “an amd” would you? that would be silly. if you said you got an amd people would say “what did you put it in?” “oh, its a dell.” because an amd just does nothing without the rest of the laptop.

Noting that the issue seems to have died down in recent years, and mindful of Shakespeare’s observation on roses, names and smells, I wondered if anyone really cares anymore what Linux is called. So, I put the issue to a number of movers and shakers in Linux and open-source circles by asking the simple question, “Is it GNU/Linux or just plain Linux?”

oh come on, you did not… this article is a rehash of so many like that open source fanboys do from year to year to year. you didnt really wonder at all.

So, I put the issue to a number of movers and shakers in Linux and open-source circles

 

ha! you asked “linux circles” if you call it linux? we already know what “open-source” calls it. your bias is built right into your sources. this is a farce.

“This has been one of the more ridiculous debates in the FOSS realm, far outdistancing the Emacs-vi rift”, said Larry Cafiero, a longtime Linux advocate and FOSS writer who pulls publicity duties at the Southern California Linux Expo. “It’s akin to the Chevrolet-Chevy moniker. Technically the car produced by GM is a Chevrolet, but rarely does anyone trot out all three syllables. It’s a Chevy. Same with the shorthand for GNU/Linux being Linux. The shorthand version—the Chevy version—is Linux. If you insist in calling it a Chevrolet, it’s GNU/Linux.”

This has been one of the more ridiculous debates in the FOSS realm

 

yes, its ridiculous because not only does open source insist on eclipsing free software, it wants to do it in every possible way– from co-opting a social movement to changing the name of everything, to denying credit for anything accomplished over the past 15 years (“well that was then, but…”) even to pretending that the debate is over “and we won!” (but thats how the article leaves it. we arent there yet.)

Next up was Steven J. Vaughan Nichols, who’s “been covering Unix since before Linux was a grad student”. He didn’t mince any words.

yes, hes a complete shill for zdnet.

“Enough already”, he said. “RMS tried, and failed, to create an operating system: Hurd. He and the Free Software Foundation’s endless attempts to plaster his GNU name to the work of Linus Torvalds and the other Linux kernel developers is disingenuous and an insult to their work. RMS gets credit for EMACS, GPL, and GCC. Linux? No.”

Enough already”, he said. “RMS tried, and failed, to create an operating system:

 

wow. i used to think he was sort of in-the-middle as shills went.

steve: take windows– an entire “operating system,” and replace ntkernel, and call it yours. let me know what you still own when theyre done.

 

RMS gets credit for EMACS, GPL, and GCC. Linux? No.”

steve, what the heck does this even mean???

youre the ones suggesting it be called linux/linux. youre talking like stallman wants to call it gnu/gnu.

 

He and the Free Software Foundation’s endless attempts to plaster his GNU name to the work of Linus Torvalds and the other Linux kernel

uh, no? torvalds plastered the linux name onto the gnu operating system. heres how you know– the gnu operating system already existed.

and from what you said, youd think that the gnu team took linux and added it to the gnu os and called the linux kernel “gnu.” but again, they call what other people took and added linux to– and call it gnu/linux.

someone is plastering a name onto everything, but the name theyre plastering is onto it is linux.

if we can call everything linux, theres no reason that calling it “gnu/linux” is specious.

To be fair, the use of GNU-related monikers didn’t start with Stallman. An early distribution, Yggdrasil, used the term “Linux/GNU/X” in 1992, and shortly thereafter the terms “GNU/Linux” and “GNU+Linux” began showing up in Usenet and mailing-list discussions. Debian, which early on was sponsored by the Free Software Foundation, starting using the term “GNU/Linux” in 1994, which it continues to use to this day. Stallman began publicly advocating its use in 1996.

yes, to be fair.

id like gnu/steve (his argument was we are trying to plaster gnu onto everything, so this isnt any different) or as steve is known in the linux world: “linux” (the l-man, steve the kernel, linsteve 2.0) to go tell debian developers “plastering the GNU name to the work of Linus Torvalds and the other Linux kernel developers is disingenuous and an insult to their work!” and find out how that goes. go ahead, l-man, do it…

But Stallman’s advocacy always put a bad taste in some people’s mouths.

yes, but to be fair, there are people who react negatively to just about any idea.

“For me it’s always, always, always, always Linux,” said Alan Zeichick, an analyst at Camden Associates who frequently speaks, consults and writes about open-source projects for the enterprise. “One hundred percent. Never GNU/Linux. I follow industry norms.”

Well, somebody has to defend orthodoxy.

For me it’s always, always, always, always Linux,” said Alan Zeichick, an analyst at Camden Associates

 

ive heard about gnu and linux about a million times in over a decade. as of today ive heard of alan zeichick once, and camden associates (what do they even do?) once. im just going to call them linux, its the more popular term.

 

“I follow industry norms.”

so you use windows and apple mostly– ok.

Gaël Duval, founder of the once uber-popular Mandrake/Mandriva distro who’s now developing eelo, a privacy-respecting Android clone, pointed out that insisting on GNU/Linux might open the door wider than originally intended. “I understand people who support the idea to call it GNU/Linux”, he said. “On the other hand, I do not see why in this case we wouldn’t use “GNU/X11/KDE/Gnome/Whatever/Linux” for desktop systems, because graphical environments and apps are very significant in such systems.

insisting on GNU/Linux might open the door wider than originally intended. “I understand people who support the idea to call it GNU/Linux”, he said.

 

– yes, to keep the original project from being eclipsed. technically gnu eclipses unix, but a. it cant legally be called unix and b. thats what the u cleverly stands for: “gnus not unix.”

i would be perfectly happy with the name linug instead of gnu/linux, and it could stand for “linug is never undermining gnu.” i truly believe stallman would accept this.

“Personally, I’m comfortable with both Linux and GNU/Linux”, he added, “but I use simply Linux, because adding complexity in communication and marketing is generally not efficient.”

adding complexity in communication and marketing is generally not efficient.”

the message that you really want to convey after all, is that linus torvalds wrote an entire operating system.

Richi Jennings, an independent industry analyst who pens a weekly security column on TechBeacon, expressed a similar sentiment. “Look, it’s totally fair to give the GNU project its due”, he said. “On the other hand, if that fairness needs to be expressed in a naming convention, why stop at GNU? Why not also recognize BSD, XINU, PBM, OpenSSL, Samba and countless other FLOSS projects that need to be included to form a workable distro?

Why not also recognize BSD, XINU, PBM, OpenSSL, Samba and countless other FLOSS projects that need to be included to form a workable distro?

because this is a completely specious argument by their own percentage standards. even with the bsd part… though that was the best example.

note the percentage argument is entirely a thing that the linux crowd made up, and it misses the point a bit like everything else theyve said to justify co-opting free software.

“The bottom line is that ‘Linux’ is what the vast majority of people call it. So that’s what it should be called, because that’s how language works.”

The bottom line is that ‘Linux’ is what the vast majority of people call it. So that’s what it should be called,

 

by this ridiculous argument, internet explorer should be called “windows” and firefox should be called “facebook.”

Self-professed “ace Linux guru” and Linux writer Carla Schroder said, “I’ve never called it GNU/Linux. GNU coreutils, tar, make, gcc, wget, bash and so on are still fundamental tools for a lot of Linux users. Certain people can’t let any Linux discussion pass without insisting that ‘Linux’ is only the kernel. Linux distros include a majority of non-GNU software, and I’m fine with ‘Linux’ as an umbrella term for the whole works. It’s simple and it’s widely recognized.”

“Certain people can’t let any Linux discussion pass without insisting that ‘Linux’ is only the kernel.”

guess why? because linux is the kernel.

“I’m fine with ‘Linux’ as an umbrella term for the whole works. “

and the whole rewriting history part is fine too.

Tallying the votes, it looks as if the “ayes” have it, and you can call Linux what you want. If anybody gives you any grief, tell them what Schroder told me: “Arguing is fun, but I suggest that contributing financially or in other ways to GNU/Linux/FOSS projects is more helpful.”

Tallying the votes

if polling people and counting the ones who agree with your stance is what you call voting, theres got to be a place near central america you can run for office.

Arguing is fun, but I suggest that contributing financially or in other ways to GNU/Linux/FOSS projects is more helpful.”

i would say that when youre not doing that, a few arguments against rewriting history are possibly worth your time.

also, i think it helps if people call it gnu/linux.

Or, we could argue about whether it’s FOSS or FLOSS.

Or, we could argue about whether it’s FOSS or FLOSS.

its both. have a cookie.

 

there are a few stupid things about this article worth mentioning:

gnu/linux is about precedence, not percentage. that whole percentage red herring is bunk city.

creating an operating system to make users free is a loftier goal than writing a kernel to avoid a hike through the snow, and suggesting “gnu/linux” as a compromise is both generous and smart– since linux insists on taking all the credit.

gnu and also the free software movement were co-opted by linux and open source. even open source initiative co-founder bruce perens admits this, though it wasnt intentional on his part. gnu/linux was proposed as a way to give back some of the credit, after too much was taken away. it was a gracious move, and no matter how many times this “lets just agree on linux” argument is made (year after year after year) the fact is– the gnu/linux name serves a purpose regardless.

if people call it “linux” they are letting you know that they are willing to co-opt a very important work and possibly rewrite history.

if people call it “gnu/linux” they are letting you know that marketing isnt more important to them than due credit– and that they care about your freedom and what the gnu name stands for.

you dont have to care what the gnu name stands for, but it does stand for a bit more than the name “linux” does. the gnu name (while it really is just a name) indicates things to users that “linux” barely implies at times (or in practice.)

whats funny is that by poking at the name “linux,” the project to make users free continues to promote a worthier goal than just a practical piece of software– so what if it does it the way ricky gervais in extras tries to inch his way into the scene. the somewhat disingenuously-eclipsed project to make people free doesnt have to seem like its cool, it only has to do whats right.

while the industry doesnt have to do whats right, it only has to seem like its cool.

and if this kind of bs is what passes for “cool” these days, maybe these people need to get out more.

the one thing i meant to add is, ‘no matter how many times these arguments are trotted out, using the gnu name is still a reliable way to convey that you care about freedom– while calling it linux is an increasingly UNreliable way to do do that.

you have the choice, and it says where your priorities are. theres something about ‘gnu/linux’ thats hard to co-opt– those who would misuse it, would probably never use it. perhaps this is stallmans unintended genius, but i wish id thought of it.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

What Else is New


  1. The Attacks on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Have Lost Momentum and the Patent Microcosm Begrudgingly Gives Up

    The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), reaffirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) and now the Supreme Court as well, carries on preventing frivolous lawsuits; options for stopping PTAB have nearly been exhausted and it shows



  2. Software Patenting and Successful Litigation a Very Difficult Task Under 35 U.S.C. § 101

    Using loads of misleading terms or buzzwords such as "AI" the patent microcosm continues its software patents pursuits; but that's mostly failing, especially when courts come to assess pertinent claims made in the patents



  3. António Campinos Will Push Toward a France-Based Unified Patent Court (UPC)

    Frenchmen at EPO will try hard to bring momentum if not force to the Unified Patent Court; facts, however, aren't on their side (unlike Team UPC, which was always on Team Battistelli's side)



  4. In Apple v Samsung Patents That Should Never Have Been Granted May Result in a Billion Dollars in 'Damages'

    A roundup of news about Apple and its patent cases (especially Apple v Samsung), including Intel's role trying to intervene in Qualcomm v Apple



  5. Links 20/5/2018: KDevelop 5.2.2 and 5.2.3, FreeBSD 11.2 Beta 2

    Links for the day



  6. Aurélien Pétiaud's ILO Case (EPO Appeal) an Early Sign That ILO Protects Abusers and Power, Not Workers

    A famous EPO ‘disciplinary’ case is recalled; it’s another one of those EPO-leaning rulings from AT-ILO, which not only praises Battistelli amid very serious abuses but also lies on his behalf, leaving workers with no real access to justice but a mere illusion thereof



  7. LOT Network is a Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

    Another reminder that the "LOT" is a whole lot more than it claims to be and in effect a reinforcer of the status quo



  8. 'Nokification' in Hong Kong and China (PRC)

    Chinese firms that are struggling resort to patent litigation, in effect repeating the same misguided trajectories which became so notorious in Western nations because they act as a form of taxation, discouraging actual innovation



  9. CIPU is Amplifying Misleading Propaganda From the Chamber of Commerce

    Another lobbying event is set up to alarm lawmakers and officials, telling them that the US dropped from first to twelfth using some dodgy yardstick which favours patent extremists



  10. Patent Law Firms That Profit From Software Patent Applications and Lawsuits Still 'Pull a Berkheimer' to Attract Business in Vain

    The Alice-inspired (Supreme Court) 35 U.S.C. § 101 remains unchanged, but the patent microcosm endlessly mentions a months-old decision from a lower court (than the Supreme Court) to 'sell' the impression that everything is changing and software patents have just found their 'teeth' again



  11. A Year After TC Heartland the Patent Microcosm is Trying to 'Dilute' This Supreme Court's Decision or Work Around It

    IAM, Patent Docs, Managing IP and Patently-O want more litigation (especially somewhere like the Eastern District of Texas), so in an effort to twist TC Heartland they latch onto ZTE and BigCommerce cases



  12. Microsoft Attacks the Vulnerable Using Software Patents in Order to Maintain Fear and Give the Perception of Microsoft 'Safety'

    The latest patent lawsuits from Microsoft and its patent trolls (which it financially backs); these are aimed at feeble and vulnerable rivals of Microsoft



  13. Links 19/5/2018: Mesa 18.0.4 and Vim 8.1

    Links for the day



  14. Système Battistelli (ENArque) at the EPO is Inspired by Système Lamy in Saint-Germain-en Laye

    Has the political culture of Battistelli's hometown in France contaminated the governance of the EPO?



  15. In Australia the Productivity Commission Decides/Guides Patent Law

    IP Australia, the patent office of Australia, considers abolishing "innovation patents" but has not done so yet (pending consultation)



  16. Fishy Things Noticed Ahead of the Passage of a Lot of EPO Budget (Applicants' Money) to Battistelli's Other (and Simultaneous) Employer

    Observations and odd facts regarding the affairs of the council in St Germain; it certainly looks like Battistelli as deputy mayor and the mayor (Arnaud Péricard) are attempting to hide something



  17. Links 18/5/2018: AsteroidOS 1.0 Released, More Snyk/Black Duck FUD

    Links for the day



  18. Today's EPO Financially Rewards Abuses and Violations of the Law

    Battistelli shredded the European Patent Convention (EPC) to pieces and he is being rewarded for it, perpetuating a pattern of abuses (and much worse) being rewarded by the European Patent Organisation



  19. So-Called 'System Battistelli' is Destroying the EPO, Warn Insiders

    Low-quality patent grants by the EPO are a road to nowhere but a litigious climate in Europe and an unattractive EPO



  20. Rise in Patent Trolls' Activity in Germany Noted Amid Declining Patent Quality at the EPO

    The UPC would turn Europe into some sort of litigation ‘super-state’ — one in which national patent laws are overridden by some central, immune-from-the-law bureaucracy like the EPO; but thankfully the UPC continues its slow collapse



  21. EPO's Battistelli Taking Days Off Work for Political 'Duties' (Parties) in His French Theatre Where He'll Bring Buckets of EPO Budget (EPO Stakeholders' Money)

    More tales from Saint-Germain-en-Laye...



  22. Links 16/5/2018: Cockpit 168, GCompris 0.91, DHCP Bug

    Links for the day



  23. The EPO's 'Inventor Award' Scam: Part III

    An addendum to the "inventor of the year" affair, namely the case of Remmal



  24. Apple and Microsoft Are Still Suing Companies -- Using Patents of Course -- Which 'Dare' Compete (by Leveraging GNU/Linux)

    The vanity of proprietary software giants — as the latest news serves to reveal — targeting companies with patent lawsuits, both directly and indirectly



  25. The Anti-PTAB (Patent Quality), Anti-§ 101 Lobby is Losing Its Mind and It Has Become Amusing to Observe

    The rants about the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the courts and even the law itself have reached laughable levels; this reveals that the real agenda of patent maximalists is endless litigation and their methods boil down to those of an angry mob, not legal professionals



  26. EPO Has Become Overzealous About Software Patents, Probably More So Than Almost Anywhere Else

    The promotion of an extreme patent regime in Europe continues unabated; whether it succeeds or not depends on what EPO examiners and citizens of Europe can do



  27. Links 15/5/2018: Black Duck's Latest FUD and the EFF's EFFail FUD Debunked Further

    Links for the day



  28. Xiaomi, Samsung, TCL and Others Demonstrate That in a World With an Abundance of Stupid Patents Like Design Patents Nobody is Safe

    The "Cult of Patents" (typically a cabal of law firms looking to have everything on the planet patented) has created a battlefield in the mobile world; every company, once it gets big enough, faces a lot of patent lawsuits and dying companies resort to using whatever is in their "portfolio" to destroy everyone else inside the courtroom (or demand 'protection' money to avert lawsuits)



  29. A Google-Centric and Google-Led Patent Pool Won't Protect GNU/Linux But Merely 'Normalise' Software Patents

    Patent pools, which are basically the wrong solution to a very clear problem, continue to expand and promote themselves; the real solution, however, is elimination of abstract patents, notably software patents



  30. The Patent Microcosm is Still Looking for Ways to Bypass CAFC/PTAB Invalidation of Many US Patents

    In pursuit of patent maximalism (i.e. a status quo wherein US patents — no matter their age — are presumed valid and beyond scrutiny) pundits resort to new angles or attack vectors, ranging from the bottom (IPRs) to the top (Supreme Court)


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts