4 ms·
>the GNU tools are used in a huge number of operating systems You mean linux? That isn't a huge number. >and are installed on a staggering number of devices
by Sssnake 13y ago
>the GNU tools are used in a huge number of operating systems
You mean linux? That isn't a huge number.
>and are installed on a staggering number of devices
The staggering number of devices you refer to almost exclusively run busybox or one of the similar projects. GNU software is hugely bloated and not a good choice for embedded systems.
>Second, it is debatable whether sticking to Hurd was a good or a bad idea technically
No, it was fine technically. It had no developers and so nothing happened. Minix exists, obviously microkernels are possible.
- makomk 13y agoLast I heard a lot of users of Solaris and other Unixes often also use the GNU tools, though those are generally dying out in favour of Linux anyway.
- Sssnake 13y agoLast you heard wrong then. Occasionally we begrudgingly install some GNU bloatware because some poorly written software requires it. That's about it. Every other OS already comes with its own versions of all the unix tools.
- josephlord 13y agoGNU tools were often used on other OSes too including Solaris and other commercial Unixes but also Windows under Cygwin. Particularly GCC, make etc. but also command line tools such as grep where the default platform versions were often not as feature rich. I didn't use those platforms so others will remember and know better but I don't think huge was an obviously wrong description.
- Sssnake 13y agoThere is a big difference between "some people optionally could install GNU stuff in addition to their existing tools" and "those OSes use GNU tools".
- josephlord 13y ago>the GNU tools are used in a huge number of operating systems Fair enough, I read "in" as a synonym for "on" but read in a less casual way the difference could be important. Even in the "in" case I think many BSD's used GCC as the default compiler (CLANG seems to be taking over now).