3 ms·

Windows is implementing the Linux system call interface. So it's valid to include Linux in the overall name, since it's running binaries designed and targeted a

by Jasper_ 11y ago

Windows is implementing the Linux system call interface. So it's valid to include Linux in the overall name, since it's running binaries designed and targeted at Linux's own APIs. GNU/kWindows might also refer to Cygwin or gnuwin32, which are ports of GNU software to other operating systems. And people might run zsh and busybox on top of the Linux subsystem, and eliminate GNU entirely. But overall, I'm just tired and sick of the GNU project attempting to correct people on technical matters like this. I remember having a very technical conversation talking about the Linux kernel and its APIs, when rms came in and "corrected" us to tell us that the proper name of the OS is GNU/Linux. It's just rude and unwarranted at this point.

loeg 11y ago
> And people might run zsh and busybox on top of the Linux subsystem, and eliminate GNU entirely. Nevermind that many userspace components Linux-users interact with are not GNU projects. GNU was essential to the rise of Linux as the 3rd party operating system, and is still essential to the system today, but it is not the biggest piece. If people want to identify the system as Linux regardless of the other software in the system, it's fine by me.
- ryao 11y ago
  It is less essential these days than it used to be. There are replacements for just about everything from other projects. Many are under even more permissive licensing. A userland is not enough to form an OS either. It is enough to be an organ donor for other operating systems. Each Linux distribution could be considered its own OS. Also, much of the development behind GNU components were meant for other operating systems than the GNU operating system. There would be many more working on the GNU kernel if that were not the case.
kaushiks 11y ago
GNU/kWindows doesn't make any sense to begin with. Modern Windows OS is the NT kernel with the Windows user land. A more appropriate name would be GNU/NT.

by Jasper_ 11y ago

loeg 11y ago

> And people might run zsh and busybox on top of the Linux subsystem, and eliminate GNU entirely. Nevermind that many userspace components Linux-users interact with are not GNU projects. GNU was essential to the rise of Linux as the 3rd party operating system, and is still essential to the system today, but it is not the biggest piece. If people want to identify the system as Linux regardless of the other software in the system, it's fine by me.

ryao 11y ago
It is less essential these days than it used to be. There are replacements for just about everything from other projects. Many are under even more permissive licensing. A userland is not enough to form an OS either. It is enough to be an organ donor for other operating systems. Each Linux distribution could be considered its own OS. Also, much of the development behind GNU components were meant for other operating systems than the GNU operating system. There would be many more working on the GNU kernel if that were not the case.

kaushiks 11y ago

GNU/kWindows doesn't make any sense to begin with. Modern Windows OS is the NT kernel with the Windows user land. A more appropriate name would be GNU/NT.