3 ms·
There's nothing petty here, it's just semantics. When people use the word Linux they have a specific definition in mind which may or may not match the definiti
by Adverblessly 3y ago
There's nothing petty here, it's just semantics.
When people use the word Linux they have a specific definition in mind which may or may not match the definition you have in mind. Some (you included I assume) think that the definition should include Android and some (like myself) think that it shouldn't include Android.
People will continue to use the definition they find to be the most useful, and the less useful definitions will eventually become niche. For me, defining Android (or ChromeOS) as Linux is not useful since it does not live up to any of the properties that make Linux useful to me. For me, calling Android "Linux" is like calling a table a stool. It may technically be appropriate (I can technically sit on it, it has no back support, etc.) but not useful (for example, it would be awkward to place a table in front of a dining table for use as a stool).
For another such example you can look at how the game genre Roguelike transformed from meaning "Similar to the game Rogue" to "Having procedural content generation" and how RPG means "You can level up" (though it feels like in recent years the term is starting to morph into "Has a story we think is worth following").
- charcircuit 3y agoThe description of the talk is "How the quest for mainline Linux on mobile phones is faring" Mainline Linux has a very specific meaning. It refers to Linus Torvald's repository of the Linux kernel. Android using mainline Linux on a mobile phone is in scope for the talk.