4 ms·

"Since nowadays GNU without Linux isn't hugely helpful, it's basically just been assimilated into core Linux and just about every distro of Linux includes GNU u

by 3xblah 8y ago

"Since nowadays GNU without Linux isn't hugely helpful, it's basically just been assimilated into core Linux and just about every distro of Linux includes GNU utilities or GNU versions of common UNIX-born tools." Nowadays, GNU compiler collection with or without Linux can be hugely helpful. e.g., it's basically just been assimilated into "core BSD" and just about every distribution compiles with GCC. Even in the case of one "distro" where it was recently removed from "core" and replaced with clang, it is still easily added back from the ports/packages collection.

type0 8y ago
> it's basically been assimilated into every distribution of BSD. So that should be called GNU/BSD right, anyway why haven't I heard about the LiGNUx naming before is it some kind of pseudostallmanism?
- 3xblah 8y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy
- AdmiralAsshat 8y ago
  Doesn't every major GNU tool have a clean-room implementation in BSD? Or I guess it would be more correct to say that BSD and GNU are both clean-room implementations of the original UNIX tools. Just thinking of the oft-posted, "Why GNU grep is fast" article.[0] [0]https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2010-August/019310.html https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2010-Aug...
  - e12e 8y ago
    I'm not sure there are any major "gnu tools"? There are gnu flavored posix tools. I'm not saying the gnu project isn't great (and I can't stand being constrained to posix tools without gnu extensions) - but the tools are generally from unix/posix?
dehrmann 8y ago
Isn't Clang the default compiler on FreeBSD, now?
e12e 8y ago
AFAIK freebsd has depricated gcc in favour of clang, and openbsd as well. Not sure about netbsd - I think there was some experiments with pcc?
- 3xblah 8y ago
  AFAIK, still can compile FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD or DragonflyBSD for all architectures using GCC.
- IWeldMelons 8y ago
  Yeah well, but clang still has ugly corners. Take for example recent FPU bug on FreeBSD i386. GCC does not have it.

by 3xblah 8y ago

type0 8y ago

> it's basically been assimilated into every distribution of BSD. So that should be called GNU/BSD right, anyway why haven't I heard about the LiGNUx naming before is it some kind of pseudostallmanism?

3xblah 8y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy
AdmiralAsshat 8y ago
Doesn't every major GNU tool have a clean-room implementation in BSD? Or I guess it would be more correct to say that BSD and GNU are both clean-room implementations of the original UNIX tools. Just thinking of the oft-posted, "Why GNU grep is fast" article.[0] [0]https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2010-August/019310.html https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2010-Aug...
- e12e 8y ago
  I'm not sure there are any major "gnu tools"? There are gnu flavored posix tools. I'm not saying the gnu project isn't great (and I can't stand being constrained to posix tools without gnu extensions) - but the tools are generally from unix/posix?

dehrmann 8y ago

Isn't Clang the default compiler on FreeBSD, now?

e12e 8y ago

AFAIK freebsd has depricated gcc in favour of clang, and openbsd as well. Not sure about netbsd - I think there was some experiments with pcc?

3xblah 8y ago
AFAIK, still can compile FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD or DragonflyBSD for all architectures using GCC.
IWeldMelons 8y ago
Yeah well, but clang still has ugly corners. Take for example recent FPU bug on FreeBSD i386. GCC does not have it.