Linux Format forums

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

jjmac — Thu Apr 29, 2010 1:36 pm

Author: jjmac

Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 1:36 pm

Howdy All,

nelz wrote:

Quote:

>>
How far do you go with this? A Linux distro is called so because it is base don the Linux kernel. Yes, it includes the GNU toolset, but it also includes QT or GTK, KDE or GNOME, maybe Apache, postfix or sendmail.

Does that mean I should say I'm using GNU/QT/KDE/Apache/Postfix/GTK/Google/Mozilla/Linux?

When operating system or distro names become longer than German nouns, you know something is not quite right.
>>

Well, if it is descriptive in terms of functionality ... or standards. Then the length or form is irrelevant. What is though, is if it is correct. And if it is correct then the symbol used to reflect it will tend to become more terse.

Personally i like the usage of 'GNU Linux' in that it reflects the spirit of Linux. It was after all largely, the work done by the FSF that got the ball rolling in terms of concept and also tool usage.

A Linux wouldn't be the same without emacs, but it would still be Linux with out kde or gnome.
(Go on people, bang on about that one if you must.)

I guess one should include other editors like 'vi' etc too.

Rhakios wrote:

Quote:

>>
Nelz has a point, so why don't we just call them FLOSS distros? That covers the vast majority of software contained in them and would allow for other kernels.
>>

(You mean like, something a person can get their teeth into (grin)).

I suppose a person could really. Would a BSD be a FLOSS distro. I think it may well be so. Any distro that contained free open source software would have to be. In that case though, GNU Linux along with BSD would be subsets.

GNU Linux could also be thought of as a subset of UNIX Like systems as well.

jm

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

AndyBaxman — Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:33 pm

Author: AndyBaxman

Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:33 pm

SupercalifragilisticexpialidociOS?

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

ollie — Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:27 pm

Author: ollie

Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:27 pm

nelz wrote:

When operating system or distro names become longer than German nouns, you know something is not quite right.

... or even worse as long as Welsh place names

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

AndyBaxman — Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:09 pm

Author: AndyBaxman

Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:09 pm

nelz wrote:

With the changes mentioned recently, will you be changing the name to Bazza/MikeOS?

BikeOS?

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

nelz — Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:16 am

Author: nelz

Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:16 am

With the changes mentioned recently, will you be changing the name to Bazza/MikeOS?

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

M-Saunders — Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:05 am

Author: M-Saunders

Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:05 am

Perhaps this is covered in the insanely huge GNU/Linux FAQ on the GNU project's website, but...

OK, the GNU folks started glibc, GCC etc. Massive kudos to them. But the vast majority of work on those programs has been done by Linux companies -- Red Hat, IBM etc. Stallman talks about the GNU+Linux ecosystem as if GNU is beaving away on its own code and the Linux kernel folks just happen to grab bits of it now and then. When in fact, if you look at the commits to these projects, they're almost entirely from Linux people and companies.

As a comparison, if someone took MikeOS and spent many years improving it beyond all recognition -- GUI, networking etc. -- I wouldn't dream of asking them to still call it MikeOS. Yeah, a bit of credit in the docs would be nice, but if 99% of the work was not done by me I can't go around trying to change the name of the new project.

Just my two Eurocents...

M

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

Rhakios — Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:55 pm

Author: Rhakios

Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:55 pm

Nelz has a point, so why don't we just call them FLOSS distros? That covers the vast majority of software contained in them and would allow for other kernels.
In fact, you could have FLOSS/Linux, FLOSS/Hurd, FLOSS/BSD, etc..

(No, I don't expect anyone to take this idea seriously)

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

towy71 — Tue Apr 27, 2010 2:01 pm

Author: towy71

Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 2:01 pm

I'm a gnu�I'm a gnu
The g-nicest work of g-nature in the zoo
I'm a gnu�how do you do?
You really oughtta g-know w-who's w-who
I'm a gnu�spelt G - N - U
I'm not a camel or a kangaroo
So let me introduce, I'm neither man nor moose
Oh, g-no, g-no, g-no, I'm a gnu!

gawd bless Flanders and Swann

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

nelz — Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:04 pm

Author: nelz

Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:04 pm

How far do you go with this? A Linux distro is called so because it is base don the Linux kernel. Yes, it includes the GNU toolset, but it also includes QT or GTK, KDE or GNOME, maybe Apache, postfix or sendmail.

Does that mean I should say I'm using GNU/QT/KDE/Apache/Postfix/GTK/Google/Mozilla/Linux?

When operating system or distro names become longer than German nouns, you know something is not quite right.

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

jjmac — Tue Apr 27, 2010 10:47 am

Author: jjmac

Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 10:47 am

ollie, i can see what your getting at, but ...

If the system is using the gnu tool set, then it must be thought of as GNU Linux.

The term indicates from which direction it is coming from.

That doesn't mean that it couldn't use some other set. But a person would be hard pressed to find a distro that does, as part of its' default. In which case, to call it GNU would be a misnomer.

Aside from other concerns, being licened by the GNU public licence does tend to suggest it to be a GNU compliant program.

jm

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

ollie — Sun Apr 25, 2010 11:01 am

Author: ollie

Posted: Sun Apr 25, 2010 11:01 am

nelz wrote:

ollie wrote:

You don't need the GNU tools for a Linux distribution to work, in fact it they aren't installed in many distributions by default.

Really? How many distros can you name that do not use coreutils?

Yes, Linux distros use coreutils, which is based on fileutils which was the GNU version of Unix common file management tools. You don't have to have them, you could use similar tools like the Ruby module FileUtils and interact with the OS through a Ruby interface. You could use The Heirloom Toolchest. Is it easier to stay with coreutils? Yes, because that tool set has become the defacto standard.

So, I stand by what I said - it is Linux not GNU/Linux.

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

RedWillow — Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:58 pm

Author: RedWillow

Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:58 pm

AndyBaxman wrote:

No, the argument is that it wasn't broken in the first place. The term Kilobyte confused nobody in the industry and the introduction of the new systems won't reduce confusion outside of it (it'll probably increase it). Its merely down some obscure desire for unitary purity.

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

AndyBaxman — Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:15 am

Author: AndyBaxman

Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:15 am

nelz wrote:

Ah yes, thirty years is an age compared with the mere 300 years that the SI standards had been internationally recognised.

Indeed. You would have thought they would have done something about it when the term "Kilobyte" first appeared rather than waiting those 30 years for it to become the de-facto standard before having a hissy fit about it.

nelz wrote:

You seem to be going back to the argument that it's been broken for so long that it shouldn't be fixed now.

nelz wrote:

We get along fine in the UK with the incompatible metric and imperial systems, because we call metres metres and yards yards.

Indeed. But nobody has told me that I cannot call a Yard a Yard. The situation is more like if we, in the UK, historically used the word "Meter" instead of Yard. Everyone was used to it, everyone knew there are 3 Feet to a Meter. Suddenly we are told that the unit clashes with the SI Metre (specifically how it is spelled in the US) and should now be called a "Wibble" and while there are 3 Feet in a Wibble there are now 3.280839895 Feet in a Meter.

nelz wrote:

Your suggestion is like the Monty Python character who called all his pets Eric instead of thinking up different names for each one.

The problem is there is one "pet" which is now required to have two names. My dog has always responded well to "Kevin" but the new regulations stipulate that is a regulated human name and will cause confusion outside of the home. In future I am required to call my dog "Rover" when outside the home but am permitted to continue calling him Kevin when he's not in public.

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

nelz — Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:39 am

Author: nelz

Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:39 am

Ah yes, thirty years is an age compared with the mere 300 years that the SI standards had been internationally recognised.

You seem to be going back to the argument that it's been broken for so long that it shouldn't be fixed now. As for forcing the use of a pair of incompatible systems, we already have that, all that we want is for the two systems to have different names.

We get along fine in the UK with the incompatible metric and imperial systems, because we call metres metres and yards yards.

Your suggestion is like the Monty Python character who called all his pets Eric instead of thinking up different names for each one.

Re: Ubuntu will go to base 10 units...

AndyBaxman — Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:02 am

Author: AndyBaxman

Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:02 am

nelz wrote:

The Taliban comment is interesting, since Linux users are usually the first to jump on their high horses when standards are violated. I suppose that only applies when others do the violating...

It depends on what you call a "standard". Standards are often created by common usage and later codified.

It could equally be argued that since 1024 bytes to a Kilobyte was in common industry use from the early 1960s and the "kibi" wasn't codified until 1999 that it was the IEC that violated a well know standard that was used by computer engineers for almost 30 years.

Forcing the use of a pair of incompatible systems in replacement of a single, well known, understood and usable system merely for the sake of notational purity is very "Taliban".