"In an email interview, Torvalds disputed the study's conclusions. "Linux never used Minix code...

Minix, he said, was simply a platform on top of which Torvalds did his programming work."

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1...9155268,00.htm

lol. thats good.

If he did his programming work on MINIX then that would be the platform Linux was first was on... Linux is a kernel and no it wouldn't have used MINIX code, that does not mean that a linux kernel couldn't be used WITH MINIX, it doesn't need to have MINIX code in it to be a kernel for MINIX, there was no GNU code in Linux kernel version 0.11 and they still managed to get Linux kernel 0.12 to run with gnu glibc and start this great wall papering of the name GNU, so this point you seem to try to enforce still means nothing.

Stright from the Linux kernel Wiki:

"MINIX, a Unix-like system intended for academic use, was released by Andrew S. Tanenbaum in 1987. While source code for the system was available, modification and redistribution were restricted. In addition, MINIX's 16-bit design was not well adapted to the 32-bit design of the increasingly cheap and popular Intel 386 architecture for personal computers.

In 1991, Linus Torvalds began to work on a non-commercial replacement for MINIX while he was attending the University of Helsinki.[8] This eventually became the Linux kernel.

Linux was dependent on the MINIX userspace at first. With code from the GNU system freely available, it was advantageous if this could be used with the fledgling OS. Code licensed under the GNU GPL can be used in other projects, so long as they also are released under the same or a compatible license. In order to make the Linux kernel compatible with the components from the GNU Project, Torvalds initiated a switch from his original license (which prohibited commercial redistribution) to the GNU GPL.[9] Linux and GNU developers worked to integrate GNU components with Linux to make a fully functional and free operating system.[6]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#MINIX

If the Wiki is wrong I am sure Linus would have edited it to make it correct. Since he has not I am going to assume it is correct, seeing that is now 2 sources that reference that Linux was indeed dependent on the MINIX user land, I think it's safe to assume it's the truth.

Would Linus have been able to edit the wiki? Don't they frown on original research?

That being true, Sometimes things on Wiki need to be corrected and they are sometimes, I am sure if this little bit was wrong Linus would have said something by now. But yea most of the data entered is correct. I'd guess maybe 0.2% of wiki is incorrect

I just wonder. Do these people seriously think you should say "gnu linux"? Or are they just trying to annoy people? Or maybe they're just obsessed with Stallman.

I think they're just trying to get attention, as Linux seems to get more and more popular, more GNU zealots keeps emerging insisting that "GNU" be part of the Linux name. It is getting to the point were people are getting pissed and going to FreeBSD just because they don't want to deal with this crap.

I still don't understand the obsession of slapping GNU on everything, Inside Windows Xp I have never seen the words "University of Berkeley" on anything or Symantec even on XP's disk manager, the people who wrote MSN didn't rename the chat client to <company>/Messenger... all this is, is just attention whoring crap, if anything will divide the community will will be this, it won't be the patents, it won't be IBM/Microsoft/Sun or Novel it will be GNU and it's outrageous obsession with slapping it's name on everything it can.

And the day it happens people like me will be going on a forking spree.

So it seems you have explained to me that V!NCENT's statement that "Linxu first started out as a MINIX kernel" does not mean that Linus started from or used the MINIX kernel code to write Linux but rather you are saying that after he wrote the Linux kernel on the MINIX system he used the Linux kernel in place of the MINIX kernel to run other MINIX programs so that explains how Linux started out as a MINIX kernel.

I will confess that was not apparent to me.

It seems we would agree with another Linus quote: "Torvalds said. "I was using Minix when I wrote Linux, but that's in the same sense that you are using Windows when you write your columns. Do your articles contain Windows source code because you use Windows to write them?"

I know I would not consider this alpha version of Linux a MINIX kernel. I do understand Linus developed Linux on MINIX and used the MINIX filesystem.

But there are some packages which are considered the base system and often are rolled into one "package" and that IS the OS. Everything else goes on top of it...

Uh, because you chose DESKTOP other software is installed besides the OS. The OS would be the base system, the part you cant live without, the part that is crucial and part of that is GNU!

Where did I say that? The kernel (which is part of the OS) is responsible for hardware support - the other part of a OS would be the part that allows a user to OPERATE and that would be userland tools.

what does userland tools have to do with hardware support?

A few posts back I already thought I solved this, but apparently not, yes the kernel is responsible for supporting the hardware initially, but without user land support this device is useless, it would be like writing drivers for a physics card but having no programs to use it with... like it or not to the end user this peace of hardware is still not supported, they can't use it so it's not supported. it maybe supported by the kernel, but if the rest of the packages (thats what i am calling Linux from now on) don't support it, it's still not supported.

What part of the GNU can't I live with (that can't be forked)?
You act like GNU is Linux's only hope of doing anything, when that is not true at all.

As the Desktop thing... I thought about that more and you are right, it is just setting on top of base packages.


@ 2damncommon
You learn something everyday , I am just trying to debunk the whole GNU process of "Nothing is without GNU", clearly people need to know the truths, I don't care if every GNU zealot out there states that Linux can't survive or Linux was born on GNU software, the truth is out there regardless of how many claim different, in reality they are only fooling themselves, it's a well documented fact, if they want to make up there own version let them.

can you point out all these documents?

Also, can you tell me what all GNU does provide? Will linux "run" without those? As in, could I have mandrake installed without the things GNU provides?

It's very easy to see how much of GNU stuff goes into a working linux system. If you really want to know, that is.

1) Get the LFS (Linux From Scratch) book here. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/stable/

2) Look through Section 3.2 that lists all packages needed for building a working system. That is, the one that lets you log in and type "whoami", if nothing else.

3) Put a little check mark against every package on that page that lists gnu.org as its place for download or as its homepage.

You'll see how much of linux is left if you remove all these packages. It's not nothing, but it's pretty darn close...

Wikipedia, Linus's quotes and any other site accept GNU.org that has the history of Linux.

I have posted 2 sites in this thread alone, so if you want them go find them.

And right now the current system can't be ran without GNU tools no, but if the Linux kernel itself was modified to run with GNU tools in the first then there is no reason why it can't be modified again to support it's own tools or someone else's.

It's either that or go back to Linux kernel 0.11 and it's user land utilitys.

What makes you think that the kernel was modified to run with GNU tools?
As somebody already said here, kernel is like a car engine. With some degree of ingenuity you can make it run on your garage floor, without any car attached to it. No wheels, transmission or brakes. But it will not take you to a vacation trip this way, running on your garage floor, you see... You need an actual car around it to make it useful. Kernel is the engine. GNU utilities make the car.
What's the rush? I like the current state of affairs, why do you wanna break it?

Exactly and without mounting the engine to the floor it will start to walk on you, then when you open up the throttle it will start to dance and before you know it will start to throw itself around. (this is why cars have motor mounts, to keep the engine in one place in one piece)

The Linux kernel as I have stated and backed up my claim with 2 links (one being Wikipedia) for the 10 hundredth time! Was dependent on MINIX, since we already know this and we know that and we are assuming GNU code is clean the kernel would have had to be modified, either that or gnu tools are just reverse engineered MINIX tools and if that is true then we could just use the older MINX tools as a base to start Linux without GNU, since it seems that people start to think "GNU" is the operating system, let see how much it operates when you have no kernel to operate with.