(ℹ) Join us now at the IRC channel | ䷉ Find the plain text version at this address (HTTP) or in Gemini (how to use Gemini) with a full GemText version.
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://www.linkedin.com/posts/sdalbera_last-week-i-published-a-post-revisiting-activity-7333042661991272448-plMI/ | May 28 03:14 |
|---|---|---|
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.linkedin.com | Last week, I published a post revisiting the pivotal—yet often… | Stéphane Dalbera | May 28 03:14 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | "Last week, I published a post revisiting the pivotal—yet often overlooked—role Richard Stallman played in the early days of the movement that would eventually lead to GNU/Linux. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://lnkd.in/d3V3Qgpz | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | --- | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | My friend Alain Chesnais took the opportunity to share, in a private message, some delightful anecdotes from the early 1980s, when he hosted RMS during a visit to Paris. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Unfortunately, those can’t be shared publicly—but he did offer one story that can. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | After delivering a talk titled “Copyright vs. Community in the Age of Computer Networks,” Stallman held a fundraising auction for the Free Software Foundation. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Among the items up for bid: a plush toy of the GNU mascot. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | In the audience that day was 🪗 Joey de Villa, then working at Microsoft—the very embodiment of evil, in Stallman’s worldview. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Joey’s role? | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | "Promoting Microsoft to ‘unfriendly’ technical audiences—namely mobile, web, and open source developers, with whom the company had weak or non-existent relationships. He ‘won over’ developers and technology influencers who originally had strong negative opinions of Microsoft, and helped increase its influence in one of the world’s fastest-growing tech hubs.” | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Joey began bidding—and what followed was a memorable exchange: | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - “You should know that he’s with Microsoft!” someone in the audience warned Stallman. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - “There are anti-animal cruelty laws,” Stallman replied, looking directly at Joey. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - “You have The Empire’s assurance that no harm will come to him,” Joey shot back. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Joey ended up winning the auction. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Stallman, visibly puzzled, couldn’t quite grasp why someone from Microsoft would want a gnu plush—let alone pay that much for it. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - “You do promise to obey anti-animal cruelty laws?” Stallman asked again, as if the plush were a living, breathing gnu. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - “I won’t harm a hair on its head. I do come from the Free Software world,” Joey replied—careful not to say “Open Source,” for fear of derailing the deal. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | And then, the final twist: Joey pulled out his Microsoft corporate credit card. | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - “Would it be all right if I paid with this?” 🫨 | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | You can read the full story on Joey’s blog by following this link | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://lnkd.in/drMwC3MY | May 28 03:14 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | So Microsoft has contributed to funding the FSF.🤭" | May 28 03:14 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.linkedin.com | GNU was to change the world, Linux was "just for fun" | May 28 03:14 | |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-lnkd.in | LinkedIn | May 28 03:15 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jvqqfty6 | May 28 03:47 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes- ( status 403 @ https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1jvqqfty6 ) | May 28 03:47 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | " | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | The best thing you can do if you are a software engineer working at Microsoft is to voluntary resign unless you already have a layoff notice in hand. Then you can finally get your d-mb behind out of dearly depressing Seattle once and for all. At the top of your list where to move to next? Your first of locations you should move yourself to, should be West Virginia? You ask why huh? Well in West Virgina every single Coal Mine is hir | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ing Coal miners and if you are hooked on working overtime like you do at Microsoft, you can continue to do so working as a coal miner in West Virginia and make a bundle of money. | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Your To Do List: | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Voluntary resign from your boring software engineering Microsoft job, unless you have received a layoff notice already. | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Sell as much of your junk as you can like video games. You want to lighten the load of junk you will move to West Virginia | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Pack the remaining junk you own into your Toyota Prius | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Start driving to West Virginia | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Once you arrive in West Virginia began applying to Coal miner jobs at all the Mines you can. | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | With this plan you should have a coal miner job within a day or two. | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | About after 6 months where you have saved some serious money, drive your Toyota Prius off the biggest cliff you can find in West Viriginia. | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | If you survive step number 7 above, go to the many Ford Dealers in West Virginia and get the best deal you can and buy a brand new 2025 Ford F-150 Raptor Truck. | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Make plans for a vacation. a year after your first day working as a coal miner. But where you decide to go on vacation too, don't chose Seattle. | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | " | May 28 03:47 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | "The two types of open source" | May 28 06:15 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | x https://filiph.net/text/two-types-of-open-source.html | May 28 06:15 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-filiph.net | The two types of open source | May 28 06:15 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has left #techbytes | May 28 07:26 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 07:46 | |
| *fantom has quit (Ping timeout: 120 seconds) | May 28 07:47 | |
| *fantom (~fantom@freenode-ff6.5hs.anfioq.IP) has joined #techbytes | May 28 08:09 | |
| *schestowitz-TR has quit (*.net *.split) | May 28 09:05 | |
| *schestowitz-TR (~acer-box@freenode-v3a.5o5.hl01nn.IP) has joined #techbytes | May 28 09:05 | |
| *fantom has quit (Ping timeout: 120 seconds) | May 28 09:09 | |
| *fantom (~fantom@freenode-ff6.5hs.anfioq.IP) has joined #techbytes | May 28 09:15 | |
| *itech (~itech@hhp3zhu2m7wvq.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 10:02 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has left #techbytes | May 28 11:22 | |
| *itech has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!) | May 28 11:23 | |
| *GNUmoon2 has quit (connection closed) | May 28 11:59 | |
| *GNUmoon2 (~GNUmoon@aczvx3vkgddvc.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 12:00 | |
| *GNUmoon2 has quit (connection closed) | May 28 12:35 | |
| *GNUmoon2 (~GNUmoon@xy8f3cfvrmnvi.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 12:38 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 12:47 | |
| *pi_ (~quassel@jcfiaarnjjqje.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 13:02 | |
| *pi_ is now known as schestowitz-pi | May 28 13:03 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has left #techbytes | May 28 13:09 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 13:21 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has left #techbytes | May 28 13:58 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 14:06 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has left #techbytes | May 28 15:54 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 16:12 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has left #techbytes | May 28 16:25 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 16:35 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://lxer.com/module/forums/t/36947/ | May 28 16:46 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-LXer: Debian Installer Trixie RC 1 release (official announcement): Debian 13 (Trixie) Installer Reaches First Release Candidate | May 28 16:46 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | "Google's search for "Debian Installer Trixie RC 1 release" provides the link for this official announcement wherever you are currently staying. There is also post "Debian Installer Trixie RC 1 Adds Rescue Support On Btrfs, Upgraded Linux 6.12 Kernel" at phoronix.com https://www.phoronix.com/news/Debian-Installer-Trixie-RC1 which is publicly available as well. Post at phoronix.com focus your attention at the features - 1.Moving to | May 28 16:46 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | the Linux 6.12.27 LTS kernel image ; 2. Preliminary support for rescuing Debian installed to a Btrfs sub-volume and 3.Installing spice-vdagent under QEMU/KVM if carrying out a desktop installation of Debian Linux. | May 28 16:46 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Post at phoronix.com also mentions that :- Some firmware packages are also no longer included either globally or on a per-arch basis for some if they are not useful with the installer, rely on non-free components, or with the current Debian kernel configuration." | May 28 16:46 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-Debian Installer Trixie RC 1 Adds Rescue Support On Btrfs, Upgraded Linux 6.12 Kernel - Phoronix | May 28 16:46 | |
| *itech (~itech@prjzhryurypj4.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 16:52 | |
| *itech has quit (connection closed) | May 28 17:35 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has left #techbytes | May 28 18:36 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2025/05/event-report-c5-pharma-biotech-patent.html?showComment=1748357448872#c8310135638149526928 | May 28 18:40 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ">Rose, regarding the questions posed in G 1/24, I am not sure that it is possible to draw a distinction between:<br />- the question of whether the description can be used to redefine otherwise clear claim language; and<br />- the question of whether the claims should be read in the context of the description as a whole.<br /><br />This is because both questions ultimately aim to determine the" | May 28 18:40 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | Event report: C5 Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation in Europe (Day 1), Plausibility, UPC and antibody IP strategy - The IPKat | May 28 18:40 | |
| *itech (~itech@7be79mqwanypc.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 19:42 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2025-05/msg00006.html | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | "* Akira Urushibata <afu@wta.att.ne.jp> [2025-05-26 20:32]: | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > In this article I will provide a typical example of an operation and | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > discuss how we can use it in our advocacy efforts. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Thanks so much for your good intentions. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Improvements in graphical user interfaces have made computers easy to | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > use. However, graphical user interfaces become cumbersome when the | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > same task must be repeated many times over. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | That is so right and we don't have ideal computing environments. wish | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | that would change one day. I think that large language models with | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | natural language processing are the way to go to direct computer on | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | what to do and to generate repetitions, loops and other workflows just | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | by telling to computer what has to be done. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Adding the a multiple-input file feature to any utility requires | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > effort. In addition small variations may appear on how it is actually | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > implemented, obliging users to learn anew the details unique to each | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > application. It makes more sense to provide a universal apparatus for | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > handling the common case of multiple inputs. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | In general, our file systems and systems for dealing with files are | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | not ideal. I can totally understand what you mean. However, a | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | universal apparatus is not a goal, because we cannot standardize, just | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | like you said it in the last email, but we can make software and let | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | people choose what to use. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | I have made my own computing and file environment in such a way that I | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | can relate files to people, to other files, to documents, notes, I can | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | tag them, have types and subtypes. This classification allows me to | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | get files by various intersections or relations. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | The actual file location is totally unknown to me as a user, I have no | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | idea where it is. But the speed to access the file is so much | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | shorter, because I am finding it by semantic relationships, tags, | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | types, subtypes and so on. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > In many real-life instances the files the user desires to convert are | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > not all in one flat directory but rather scattered around, often in a | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > nested structure of directories. Also there are cases in which there | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > are files which should not be converted mingling with others which | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > definitely should. If each application had to offer the capacity to | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > deal with such complicated requests, they would become sophisticated | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > in the bad sense of the word. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | I think that file system is not the best way for human to interact | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | with it. I just think that better way is using the dynamic knowledge | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | repository as defined by Mr. Doug Engelbart, the inventor of a lot of | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | computing innovations and the mouse. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | About Dynamic Knowledge Repositories (DKR): | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://www.dougengelbart.org/content/view/190/163/ | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > The absence of terminology reflects low interest in the issue. Batch | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > conversion of multiple files is a mundane task that should not be | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > taken lightly. A typo can lead to erasure of files or the creation of | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > too many files. In another scenario the demands of an inefficient | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > conversion may add up and eventually overload the entire system. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | When I am looking at it, it is very easy now to create various loops | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | and go over the files. But that's what I say, it is easy, it is not | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | integrated, just like you say. So there is a variety of situations | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | which can take place and you are right, there may be many errors. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | But we could use the large language models to tell the program to | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | avoid any errors. That way, at least we improve the system. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | For example: | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ------------ | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Here is an example of a shell command to convert all your PNG files | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > (named *.png) to JPEG files named *.jpg: | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > for i in *.png; do pngtopam $i | pnmtojpeg >`basename $i .png`.jpg; done | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Make this loop better that if something is wrong, that it is detected before | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > the conversion actually takes place. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Then: | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ----- | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | #!/bin/bash | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Check required commands are available | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | if ! command -v pngtopam >/dev/null 2>&1 || ! command -v pnmtojpeg >/dev/null | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | 2>&1; then | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | echo "Error: Required commands (pngtopam or pnmtojpeg) not found" >&2 | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | exit 1 | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | fi | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Process each PNG file | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | for i in *.png; do | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Skip if no PNG files exist | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | [ -f "$i" ] || continue | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 28 20:21 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Check if input file is readable | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | if [ ! -r "$i" ]; then | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | echo "Error: Cannot read file '$i'" >&2 | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | continue | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | fi | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 28 20:21 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Set output filename | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | outfile="$(basename "$i" .png).jpg" | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 28 20:21 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Check if output file would be writable | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | if [ -e "$outfile" ] && [ ! -w "$outfile" ]; then | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | echo "Error: Cannot overwrite file '$outfile'" >&2 | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | continue | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | fi | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 28 20:21 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Perform the conversion with error checking | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | if ! pngtopam "$i" | pnmtojpeg > "$outfile"; then | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | echo "Error: Conversion failed for '$i'" >&2 | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Remove failed output file if it was created | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | [ -f "$outfile" ] && rm -f "$outfile" | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | continue | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | fi | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 28 20:21 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | echo "Successfully converted '$i' to '$outfile'" | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | done | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | And as you say, universal approach to loop over the files would be the | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | best. Just that we don't have such universal approach. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > There is much effort spent in advertising the "Linux" OS as | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > user-friendly and easy to use. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | But that is also true depending from which viewpoint you look at | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | it. There is now a lot of GNU Linux distributions, which are very | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | user-friendly. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > People who seek user-friendly computers regard command-line tools as | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > a relic of the past. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | I would not generalize it because that is simply a different group of | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | users who use the graphics user interface. They are not as powerful | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | as those using command line tools. If they think it is something of | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | the past, that is just a generalization. They are not on the same | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | level as developers who know how to deal with it. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Any agent promoting "Linux" would thus rather hide them from the | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > general public. Thus people have few opportunities to see how | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > experts actually do work with the OS. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Opportunities are today more than ever. There are many videos, there | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | are many YouTube videos, there are explanations on many software | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | repositories, so there is now much more use of the command lines and | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | all the software is now at the maximum. So it's not like there are | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | few opportunities, I can't see that. I see much more opportunities for | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | the last 25 years. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > In addition there is a persistent campaign against the name "GNU". | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Yes, that is somehow true, but the campaign is not from a single | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | source. It comes from opinions from various different groups. And of | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | course there is a reason for that. It's political reason. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > The above procedure employs GNU Bash and GNU coreutils. Other | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > utilities often used in conjunction are provided by GNU findutils, | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > GNU diffutils, GNU grep, GNU sed, GNU awk. The negative campaign | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > discourages people from understanding how GNU utilities are actually | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > employed and leaves them with a shallow, distorted view of the entire | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > system. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Then it is up to us to make it right, you see. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Some attempts have appeared to find a term to fill the void. "Cloud" | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > is a vague term, but for some people it is mostly about efficient | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > command-line procedures which system management requires. Some others | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > speak of the operations as part of "Linux". In fact I have heard that | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > a major reason Microsoft decided to provide "Window System for Linux" | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > (WSL), is that "cloud" operators became accustomed to using "Linux" | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > command-line utilities and felt inconvenienced by their absence in | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > ordinary Windows environments. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Whatever Microsoft says, I am not really keen to trust that company. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > The above observation gives me an idea for an new strategy for | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > promoting GNU. There is a problem that requires a solution. We can | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > explain the problem and the potential outcome of not solving it | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > properly. After convincing people that a problem exists we can | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > explain how it is best solved, how to find the engineers who know the | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > right solution, what tools they use and where the tools come from. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | The best way of promoting GNU is helping people install the system and | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | then delve into researching it. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Thanks so much for your insightful view from Japan and many greetings. | May 28 20:21 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Jean Louis" | May 28 20:21 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-lists.gnu.org | Re: What we can learn from a typical operation | May 28 20:21 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2025-05/msg00005.html | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | "* Akira Urushibata <afu@wta.att.ne.jp> [2025-05-13 17:45]: | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Like many other UNIX-derived utilities, make is a language. As a | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > language it is tough to study. There are several reasons for this. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > For one thing GNU Make, the most widely used implementation, is rich | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > in features. The intricate details make GNU Make textbooks such as | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > the one from O'Reilly hard to digest: the reader is easily | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > disoriented. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | That's because when learning any subject first you must make sure that | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | you understand each single word and if you don't understand a word you | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | have to clarify the word or clear the word before moving forward with | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | reading. If you ensure of defining those words before you read you | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | will have no trouble in learning. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > In addition, and perhaps more importantly, there is an acute shortage | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > of makefiles to use as study material. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | I was surprised when reading this when it is well known that there are | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | so many Make files very easy to find. Did you try searching software | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | repositories? | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Then if you need examples of a make file, what you can also do, you | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | can ask any large language model to give you such examples. It's like | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | within a second you can get an example. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | project/ | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | │ | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ├── main.c | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ├── utils.c | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ├── utils.h | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | └── Makefile | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | main.c | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ------ | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | #include <stdio.h> | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | #include "utils.h" | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | int main() { | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | printf("The sum of 3 and 5 is %d\n", add(3, 5)); | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | return 0; | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | } | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | utils.c | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ------- | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | #include "utils.h" | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | int add(int a, int b) { | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | return a + b; | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | } | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | utils.h | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | ------- | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | #ifndef UTILS_H | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | #define UTILS_H | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | int add(int a, int b); | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | #endif | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Makefile: | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | --------- | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Compiler to use | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | CC = gcc | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Compiler flags | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | CFLAGS = -Wall -Wextra | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Object files | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | OBJS = main.o utils.o | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Executable name | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | TARGET = my_program | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Default target | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | all: $(TARGET) | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Link the object files into the final executable | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | $(TARGET): $(OBJS) | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -o $@ $^ | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Compile the source files into object files | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | %.o: %.c | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -c $< | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Clean up the build | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | clean: | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | rm -f $(OBJS) $(TARGET) | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # Phony targets | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | .PHONY: all clean | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Makefiles describe the build processes of the Linux kernel, GCC, | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Glibc, GNU binutils, GNU coreutils, Bash and most other major OS | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > components. However the packages seldom come with a ready-to-run | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > makefile. Instead the makefile is produced by a configure script. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Such machine-generated makefiles are difficult to analyze and are of | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > little educational value. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Makefiles are versatile tools and can be used for a variety of tasks | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | beyond just building software. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | See more examples here: | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://gnu.support/files/tmp/clipboard-2025-05-28-09-37-44.html | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Most people who have heard of a "Linux" OS aren't aware about this. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Maybe because they are not developers. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > They assume that "Linux" is a standard. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | To understand what large group of people really think or assume, one | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | would need to make a survey. For example, one could ask 1000 users if | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | they assume that Linux is some standard, and then evaluate the survey | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | by percentage groups of their answers. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Many people have names of their GNU/Linux distributions. The fact that | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | there are so many distributions also speaks that there is no single | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | standard, even though many distributions rely on plethora of various | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | standards. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > In reality there is no "standard Linux", only distributions which | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > combine system components and popular applications selected in | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > accordance to certain policies. When it comes to the actual | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > components that go into distributions there is significant variation. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > For example, most distributions use Bash as the default shell and Gawk | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > as the awk interpreter but Debian employs Dash and Mawk, respectively, | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > in their places. The configure and make procedure makes this | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > possible. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | That is the freedom we want. There is absolutely no need for | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | standardization so that every software distribution is the same. What | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | we want is the freedom and the freedom gives diversity. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > I suspect that those who promote "Linux" for the name of the entire | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > OS do not want people to find out that there is no such thing as a | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > "standard Linux". | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Actually, I don't think so. I don't share this opinion. I think that | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | those people who promote any software distribution, they are promoting | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | their own projects and there is a choice of many, many different | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | distributions. So that is okay and good for the society. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Our efforts to promote the name "GNU/Linux" for the entire OS have not | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > been totally successful. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | The point is if the GNU system is bundled with the Linux kernel, then | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | we call it GNU Linux. Other parties need not call it that way. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Here is a list of GNU/Linux distributions that explicitly include "GNU" in | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | their name alongside Linux, as referenced in the search results: | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | 1. **Dragora GNU/Linux-libre** | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - A fully free distribution using the Linux-libre kernel and Runit as its | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | init system. It emphasizes freedom and reliability but is noted for | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | installation challenges . | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | 2. **GNU Guix System** | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - Developed by the GNU Project, it features a declarative configuration | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | model and its own package manager. It uses the Linux-libre kernel and avoids | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | non-free software entirely . | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | 3. **Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre** | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - An Arch-based distribution prioritizing software freedom. It uses | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Linux-libre, avoids SystemD, and focuses on long-term stability by holding back | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | packages . | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | 4. **Parabola GNU/Linux-libre** | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - Another Arch-based distro stripped of non-free components, using | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Linux-libre. It supports both SystemD and OpenRC and maintains 32-bit support . | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | 5. **Trisquel GNU/Linux** | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - Based on Ubuntu but fully compliant with FSF guidelines. It uses a | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | deblobbed Linux-libre kernel and offers editions like MATE, LXDE, and Sugar . | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | 6. **Utoto GNU/Linux** | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - Originally Gentoo-based, later switched to Ubuntu. It was the first | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | FSF-certified distro but is now considered discontinued . | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | 7. **Dyne:bolic GNU/Linux** | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - A multimedia-focused live distribution designed for offline use. It is | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | outdated (last release in 2011) and 32-bit only . | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | 8. **PureOS** | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - While not always labeled "GNU/Linux," it is FSF-approved and based on | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Debian, with a focus on privacy and removing binary blobs from the kernel . | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Notes: | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - The Free Software Foundation (FSF) endorses these distributions for their | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | strict adherence to free software principles, including the use of GNU | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | components and avoidance of proprietary blobs . | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | - Some distributions like **Debian** and **Fedora** include GNU tools but are | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | not FSF-certified due to non-free repositories or firmware . | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | For further details, refer to the FSF's recommendations or the | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | respective project pages. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > So I suggest that we, instead of merely attaching "GNU" to "Linux", | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > send a message that "GNU" and "Linux" are separate, and that the | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > engineers who are aware of the difference and treat it as something | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > other than a political disagreement possess a set of valuable skills. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Those who make the distinction and are aware of what the "GNU" part is | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > capable of are adept with operations such as installation of software, | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > backing up data, adding or replacing hardware, salvaging a damaged | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > system and conducting tests before and after any major change. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | GNU and Linux are always separate though work together when they are | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | put together. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | GNU/Linux means GNU operating system with the Linux kernel. Engineers | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | know very well that Linux is the kernel and that it does nothing | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | alone, it doesn't offer operating environment or system. GNU is one | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | system, and there are different systems based on Linux kernel. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > We should try to enlighten people to the fact that instead of a | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > "standard Linux system" we have an "ecosystem with various GNU/Linux | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > distributions". | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Ecosystem: | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Ecosystem | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | It is not really word to promote in the GNU project. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | I think that it is enough known that there are many, many different | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | GNU/Linux distributions. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > It may be difficult, given the existing prejudices, but people are | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > aware that their lives are ever more reliant on computer systems and | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > there are great benefits in truly understanding them while the risks | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > associated to ignorance is growing steadily. | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | I don't even know, is it possible to understand if there are | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | prejudices or not without doing the actual public survey? | May 28 20:22 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Jean Louis" | May 28 20:22 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.dougengelbart.org | About DKRs - Doug Engelbart Institute | May 28 20:23 | |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-lists.gnu.org | Re: Make's place in the operating system | May 28 20:27 | |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-gnu.support | clipboard | May 28 20:29 | |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.gnu.org | Words to Avoid (or Use with Care) Because They Are Loaded or Confusing - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation | May 28 20:33 | |
| *itech has quit (connection closed) | May 28 22:06 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 22:12 | |
| *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has left #techbytes | May 28 22:33 | |
| *itech (~itech@jkkdx2k9ufpeg.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 28 23:23 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.6 | ䷉ find the plain text version at this address (HTTP) or in Gemini (how to use Gemini) with a full GemText version.