5 ms·

This kind of pedantry always appears when people are trying to have a discussion about non-android linux distributions on mobile devices. You know full well wh

This kind of pedantry always appears when people are trying to have a discussion about non-android linux distributions on mobile devices. You know full well what they're talking about when they say "linux" here and it's not "android."

yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
Okay, but Android literally is a Linux distro, or family of distros perhaps. I'm happy to agree that we really need better terminology, but the answer is better terminology, not less precise terminology. - "Linux" is bad because Android is Linux. - "GNU/Linux" doesn't quite work because 1. ChromeOS is GNU/Linux and 2. Alpine isn't. - "mainline Linux" is a thing we want, but still separate - I'd take Droidian with a hacked-up vendor kernel over a Pixel running an official Android image on mainline Linux any day. The best I've been able to come up with is something like "user-controlled Linux" or "community OS" or even just "not Android", but I'd really prefer a better term.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  Android officially does not support Linux APIs for userspace. https://developer.android.com/ndk/guides/stable_apis https://developer.android.com/ndk/guides/stable_apis Applications deployed via Play Store might crash and burn by ignoring this fact, which is a reason why termux nowadays must be sideloaded.
- Adverblessly 3y ago
  > - "Linux" is bad because Android is Linux. If you are being precise, Android is not Linux (and neither is Debian for that matter). It is an operating system that uses the Linux kernel. > The best I've been able to come up with is something like "user-controlled Linux" or "community OS" or even just "not Android", but I'd really prefer a better term. Here is my proposal, we continue to call operating systems like those "Linux" and call operating systems like Android and ChromeOS "Operating systems that use the Linux kernel". No reason to give the common and useful definition an awkward name like "Community OS" just to allow the abberant cases to continue to reside within the "Linux" definition.
  - fsflover 3y ago
    Or simply use the old term GNU/Linux wherever appropriate.
    - fruitreunion1 3y ago
      Well, Alpine wouldn't fit that definition but is still a user-controlled Linux.
- linmob 3y ago
  Oh yeah. I've landed on the (slightly weird) "GNU-like Mobile Linux".
- fruitreunion1 3y ago
  Another term I've seen used is "traditional Linux distributions" as opposed to locked-down/less general purpose like Android and Chrome OS.
charcircuit 3y ago
The Android ecosystem has had billions and billions of dollars invested into it along with industry buy in. Ignoring it because of some small petty reasons is just a classic case of Linux users wanting to avoid success at all costs.
- donkeybeer 3y ago
  The point about people wanting to use Linux on pc/phone is ownership of their machines. Do you own 99% of smartphones (Android and Apple) that currently exist? They are much more blackbox and user hostile than even laptops and desktops today.
  - charcircuit 3y ago
    I own less than 1% of the available phone models that exist, but I don't see how that is relevant. >They are much more blackbox and user hostile than even laptops and desktops today. They are much more user friendly than most Linux distros for desktop/pc. Most users and developers will never understand how their phone's OS works and that is okay. Abstractions are a very powerful concept in software engineering. If you think there are user hostile features in Android, it will be much easier to make an Android fork that removes them instead of trying to recreate a whole entire mobile OS and software stack.
    - donkeybeer 3y ago
      Because thats the very point of wanting to use a linux pc or phone, to escape the swamps of user hostile evil garbage. A computer is a computer is a computer. If there weren't artificially constructed restrictions (and boy do they work hard to create these restrictions: millions of lines of code, developing encryption algorithms, etc) anything could run on anything (if the hardware exists, and in this light phones and laptops have all the required hardware).
    - donkeybeer 3y ago
      And its mostly not Android the os itself per se but the phone makers. Ask yourself, why is it that you can't install any os you want on almost all phones? Even something as basic as a root shell is hard/impossible to have on so many models. Why phone model and os are so tightly tied together? Ever heard of say random desktop pc only being able to run specific Windows version or specific Linux version? That, basically, is the root of all problems.

yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago

Okay, but Android literally is a Linux distro, or family of distros perhaps. I'm happy to agree that we really need better terminology, but the answer is better terminology, not less precise terminology. - "Linux" is bad because Android is Linux. - "GNU/Linux" doesn't quite work because 1. ChromeOS is GNU/Linux and 2. Alpine isn't. - "mainline Linux" is a thing we want, but still separate - I'd take Droidian with a hacked-up vendor kernel over a Pixel running an official Android image on mainline Linux any day. The best I've been able to come up with is something like "user-controlled Linux" or "community OS" or even just "not Android", but I'd really prefer a better term.

pjmlp 3y ago
Android officially does not support Linux APIs for userspace. https://developer.android.com/ndk/guides/stable_apis https://developer.android.com/ndk/guides/stable_apis Applications deployed via Play Store might crash and burn by ignoring this fact, which is a reason why termux nowadays must be sideloaded.
Adverblessly 3y ago
> - "Linux" is bad because Android is Linux. If you are being precise, Android is not Linux (and neither is Debian for that matter). It is an operating system that uses the Linux kernel. > The best I've been able to come up with is something like "user-controlled Linux" or "community OS" or even just "not Android", but I'd really prefer a better term. Here is my proposal, we continue to call operating systems like those "Linux" and call operating systems like Android and ChromeOS "Operating systems that use the Linux kernel". No reason to give the common and useful definition an awkward name like "Community OS" just to allow the abberant cases to continue to reside within the "Linux" definition.
- fsflover 3y ago
  Or simply use the old term GNU/Linux wherever appropriate.
  - fruitreunion1 3y ago
    Well, Alpine wouldn't fit that definition but is still a user-controlled Linux.
linmob 3y ago
Oh yeah. I've landed on the (slightly weird) "GNU-like Mobile Linux".
fruitreunion1 3y ago
Another term I've seen used is "traditional Linux distributions" as opposed to locked-down/less general purpose like Android and Chrome OS.

charcircuit 3y ago

The Android ecosystem has had billions and billions of dollars invested into it along with industry buy in. Ignoring it because of some small petty reasons is just a classic case of Linux users wanting to avoid success at all costs.

donkeybeer 3y ago
The point about people wanting to use Linux on pc/phone is ownership of their machines. Do you own 99% of smartphones (Android and Apple) that currently exist? They are much more blackbox and user hostile than even laptops and desktops today.
- charcircuit 3y ago
  I own less than 1% of the available phone models that exist, but I don't see how that is relevant. >They are much more blackbox and user hostile than even laptops and desktops today. They are much more user friendly than most Linux distros for desktop/pc. Most users and developers will never understand how their phone's OS works and that is okay. Abstractions are a very powerful concept in software engineering. If you think there are user hostile features in Android, it will be much easier to make an Android fork that removes them instead of trying to recreate a whole entire mobile OS and software stack.
  - donkeybeer 3y ago
    Because thats the very point of wanting to use a linux pc or phone, to escape the swamps of user hostile evil garbage. A computer is a computer is a computer. If there weren't artificially constructed restrictions (and boy do they work hard to create these restrictions: millions of lines of code, developing encryption algorithms, etc) anything could run on anything (if the hardware exists, and in this light phones and laptops have all the required hardware).
  - donkeybeer 3y ago
    And its mostly not Android the os itself per se but the phone makers. Ask yourself, why is it that you can't install any os you want on almost all phones? Even something as basic as a root shell is hard/impossible to have on so many models. Why phone model and os are so tightly tied together? Ever heard of say random desktop pc only being able to run specific Windows version or specific Linux version? That, basically, is the root of all problems.