Shall malicious distros be rejected by Linux community?

Hi Guys,

There are many examples of good an bad distros.
It is find.

However there are few "distros" that shall not be called Linux and the users shall be aware about few things.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-c...CNp-vksc#t=216

Linux shall be open-source. If there is no source code, we shall reject it.

It would be wise to avoid saying that Ubuntu and Android is part of the Linux Community, for instance.

Furthermore, look how messy is the coding of Gnome, Gimp, Inkscape,...
We as Linux users shall reject crappy applications. Slow, heavy, ... and do really accept good apps.

Look for instance, MS at its early beginning, it was quite good. Bill did some fantastic job, really, at that time.


I think we shall be more strict with the terming of Linux.

I use the gimp and inkscape all the time. I think they are both fantastic.

Google made it into the top 10 Linux contributors for the last few releases. The Android patches are GPL, the user-space has a more controlled, semi-open-source model.

Microsoft at the beginning was adding code to prevent MS applications from working properly on non MS operating systems like DR-DOS. The part you think is great probably came from 86-DOS which Bill bought, not wrote.

So I think you are being a little hasty with your statements.

I think you mean GNU/Linux...

I love GNOME

"One man's meat is another man's poison" Who decides? I'll take chaos tyvm.

I question one who would characterize the GIMP and Gnome as malicious. Gnome may be misguided (I find it so and try to avoid it), but that's not the same as "malicious." And the GIMP rocks.

Originally Posted by Xeratul There are many examples of good an bad distros.

Yes there are. Solution; do not use the bad ones.

Linux shall be open-source. If there is no source code, we shall reject it.

Or use a system that already has that philosophy. But even then, proprietary code can be made transparent. So visible code and open source are not necessarily the same thing.

It would be wise to avoid saying that Ubuntu and Android is part of the Linux Community, for instance.

If some people consider Android a Linux operating system, there is no cure for foolishness. Changing naming conventions because of it is even more foolish.

We as Linux users shall reject crappy applications.

1) You are free to use any applications you like and reject the ones you do not.
2) Your ideas of a good application and a crappy one are most probably different than my ideas. So who decides?

Have to admire Linux purists. Nice to know that there's always someone watching out for fishy things going on.

However, this was not necessary:

It would be wise to avoid saying that Ubuntu and Android is part of the Linux Community, for instance.

Implying that not agreeing with you is unwise, greatly diminishes the interest in the rest of your message.

Originally Posted by Xeratul Hi Guys, There are many examples of good an bad distros. It is find. However there are few "distros" that shall not be called Linux and the users shall be aware about few things. https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-c...CNp-vksc#t=216 Linux shall be open-source. If there is no source code, we shall reject it. It would be wise to avoid saying that Ubuntu and Android is part of the Linux Community, for instance. Furthermore, look how messy is the coding of Gnome, Gimp, Inkscape,... We as Linux users shall reject crappy applications. Slow, heavy, ... and do really accept good apps. Look for instance, MS at its early beginning, it was quite good. Bill did some fantastic job, really, at that time. I think we shall be more strict with the terming of Linux.

Maybe you don't understand the word malicious. Even most commercial, closed-source software isn't "malicious"
Yes Gnome and GIMP are bloated and the developers have went astray. Like any software, it happens.
Still that doesn't make it malicious.

The Linux kernel is and always will be open source. So any "Linux" is open source. It has to be for the GPL license.
Some Linux DISTRIBUTIONS contain closed source code --- which is allowed since it is just code running on top of the kernel -- not part of it.
I don't see any problems. If it bothers you, you (personally) may choose a purist orientated distro like Debian.

I had to say "Other" because how do you know for sure it's malicious? Who certifies that?

Originally Posted by linux_walt However, this was not necessary: Implying that not agreeing with you is unwise, greatly diminishes the interest in the rest of your message.

Probably just wishing to avoid one of these: Seventy-five to start a massive off-topic Apple vs Microsoft flamewar is my guess why he did that.

Just my 2 cents.

You have a right to say that Gimp and Inkscape are bloated. It might be true...

You may argue that given codes might be a mess.
Even Linus argued before that Gnome was a mess.
http://www.techdrivein.com/2011/08/l...s-gnome-3.html


One who made GNU to exist did a great video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-c...CNp-vksc#t=216
Open-source has a real meaning - Open-source is the meaning of Linux.
He really meant something, that all of us shall listen to with more attention.

And finally, people shall not mention that Microsoft is crap regularly on this board, and so on. It really brings nothing good.
I am really sorry. This is really tiring. Both Apple and Microsoft are two amazing companies.

Now I am even more confused

A video of RMS and an article from 2011 about Gnome 3.0; this thread is going places.

Hi,
I have chosen other, because I'm not sure, what you mean with malicious in the context of your question.
Furthermore you can always choose with your feet.
If you don't like a peace of software, don't install/use it. On a certain moment you have to decide if you're principles are more important (like RMS) or follow a more pragmatic line, like whatever gets the job done (like LBT).

And if you want messy code, just take a long look at the linux kernel itself.

Cheers

Originally Posted by Xeratul It would be wise to avoid saying that Ubuntu and Android is part of the Linux Community, for instance.

Well who cares what it's called, especially when you don't use the correct nomenclature either...

I think you should probably lay off reading those Stallman diatribes for a while. Your posts remind me of the usual GNU style "you should tell others not to recommend this" and "you should tell your friends not to use that" and "you should ensure that you refer to this as that"...

p.s. I'm sure that Stallman prefers and encourages the term "free software" to "open source".