GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I am not going to specify each command. That would be too large, but:
*Turning off the PC: power button. No, really, use this in Ubuntu and you get a software shutdown.
*Managing all you files (cd, ls, mv, rm, pwd, etc): use a file manager
*Managing users and displaying time: KDE (or other DE)
*printf: are you kidding? This is a function in C.
I think it would be kinda hard to not use ls and some of the other commands in a command-line enviroment[/QUOTE]
Midnight Commander EDIT/PS: Who said use the commandline? It can be done in the GUI.
I am not going to specify each command. That would be too large, but:
*Turning off the PC: power button. No, really, use this in Ubuntu and you get a software shutdown.
*Managing all you files (cd, ls, mv, rm, pwd, etc): use a file manager
*Managing users and displaying time: KDE (or other DE)
*printf: are you kidding? This is a function in C.
I think it would be kinda hard to not use ls and some of the other commands in a command-line enviroment
Midnight Commander EDIT/PS: Who said use the commandline? It can be done in the GUI.[/QUOTE]
What would you do if x broke some how and you had no command-line?, then you would be screwed. Not everyone uses the GUI for every thing, I usually use the command line for stuff. What would you do in a server environment?, you are basically describing windows when you are talking about linux without gnu utils
@AceofSpades19: You are repeating that what I allready said.
So Linux isn't really "Linux" without the gnu utils, its just basically a windows clone, which if it were a windows clone it would have been long forgotten
Know what? Let's just call it Linux, it keeps it a lot more simple. If you didn't know that Linux uses GNU software, then you're either a new user or an oblivious one.
I'm of the opinion that it's not "Linux", it's not "GNU/Linux", it's Slackware (or Ubuntu, or Mandriva, or whatever). Linux is the name of the kernel, GNU is the name of the project responsible for some of the tools used in the operating system. Both are parts of the OS, both are necessary to the OS, otherwise it would be a different OS.
When the GNU project releases and supports their own complete OS using the linux kernel, If they want to call it GNU/Linux I will. I'll still call Slackware "Slackware" and Ubuntu "Ubuntu" though.
Those are distro names. Nothing wrong with using those by themselves IMO. But to refer to GNU+Linux as just Linux is something else entirely.
Not necessarily because when you call it GNU Linux, it almost sounds the GNU project created their own distribution. To me, the whole mess was created because Stallman saw that he wasn't getting as much attention as Torvalds was, so he decided to rant and said it should be called GNU/Linux. Honestly, the things RMS does sometimes....
So Linux isn't really "Linux" without the gnu utils, its just basically a windows clone, which if it were a windows clone it would have been long forgotten
Yes. But why add the name of tools to Linux when it can run without (badly but that's not the point)? Your awnser is because otherwise Linux would never lifted off. So according to what you're saying we should name Linux: Charles Babbage/Dennis Richie/GNU/Linux along with a handfull of names to add because without them Linux wouldn't have been succesfull.
Let's just keep it simple and call it Linux. Simple names are easy to remeber and can be marketed. "Hello I am a pc, and I am a Mac, and I am a genuh-slash-linux" - "A what?".
You cant "run" linux without GNU so it is not optional ergo it is the OS ergo it should be in the name IF you are referring to the general OS. If you are referring to a certain distro then I personally use the distro name (debian,ubuntu,redhat) and when asked what they are I tell them it is GNU+Linux and I go on to explain (quickly) what that means.
I dont think it has anything to do with RMS getting attention at all. He didn't say you have to call it RMS+Linux or Stallman+Linux...
Indeed. Well, there is still a standard C library with menuet.
The site claims:
Quote:
The design goal has been to remove the extra layers between different parts of an OS, which normally complicate programming and create bugs.
which is questionable. I agree the number of layers may leave space for more bugs but these layers are here to simplify programming and increase robustness, not the opposite.
The success of Unix and Unix-like O/S proves that IMHO.
Linux made GNU famous. As a kernel is the most important and complex part of any OS, Linus deserves big credit for having the balls to start and create one.
GNU on the other hand is nowhere without linux. GNU software runs on BSD, MS-Windows, UNIX and any other OS you can think of, and none of them is half as responsible for making it famous as Linux did. I feel it somewhat of an outrage that GNU would rant against the very entity that brought it celebrity.
The reason people use GNU is because when you have a free kernel, you also expect free software for using on it.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
