Jump to content

Talk:GNU/Linux naming controversy: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Line 90: Line 90:
:::All the more reason for the title of the article to be simply "Linux naming controversy". No clutter and no undue weight for fringe POVs, like the one you yourself blatantly espouse above.[[Special:Contributions/185.23.220.233|185.23.220.233]] ([[User talk:185.23.220.233|talk]]) 11:17, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
:::All the more reason for the title of the article to be simply "Linux naming controversy". No clutter and no undue weight for fringe POVs, like the one you yourself blatantly espouse above.[[Special:Contributions/185.23.220.233|185.23.220.233]] ([[User talk:185.23.220.233|talk]]) 11:17, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
::::Except for the fact that the term "Linux" used in this context is not controversial, the name "GNU/Linux" is. The article is named for the controversy not for "not the controversy". - [[User:Ahunt|Ahunt]] ([[User talk:Ahunt|talk]]) 12:35, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
::::Except for the fact that the term "Linux" used in this context is not controversial, the name "GNU/Linux" is. The article is named for the controversy not for "not the controversy". - [[User:Ahunt|Ahunt]] ([[User talk:Ahunt|talk]]) 12:35, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

== GNU/Linux, Linux, or GNU? ==

I added that it's 'GNU/Linux,' 'Linux' or 'GNU,' but someone removed 'GNU.' Some Free/Libre/Opensource Software (FLOSS) people in their discussion areas call it GNU. Most the original software was GNU, and even the Linux kernel is under the GNU General Public License. Much the other software does also. The Free Software Foundation (FSF) that started the GNU project also calls it the GNU operating system in some cases. Is there a way I could cite a conversation with someone to prove people also argue for calling it GNU, or cite the FSF site or their founder? Richard Stallman says for the Church of Emacs 'there is no system but GNU, and Linux is one of its kernels'... so I tend to this alternative idea, that all of them are simply GNU operating systems.--[[Special:Contributions/206.63.237.146|206.63.237.146]] ([[User talk:206.63.237.146|talk]]) 23:39, 2 July 2019 (UTC)


== GNU/Linux, Linux, or GNU? ==
== GNU/Linux, Linux, or GNU? ==

Revision as of 23:40, 2 July 2019

Former featured articleGNU/Linux naming controversy is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 2, 2004.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 1, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
May 10, 2007Featured article reviewDemoted
May 11, 2011Articles for deletionKept
Current status: Former featured article

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on GNU/Linux naming controversy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:48, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on GNU/Linux naming controversy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:10, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where should I put this? (Debian's position)

From The Debian Administrator's Handbook:

BACK TO BASICS Linux or GNU/Linux?


Linux, as you already know, is only a kernel. The expressions, “Linux distribution” and “Linux system” are, thus, incorrect: they are, in reality, distributions or systems based on Linux. These expressions fail to mention the software that always completes this kernel, among which are the programs developed by the GNU Project. Dr. Richard Stallman, founder of this project, insists that the expression “GNU/Linux” be systematically used, in order to better recognize the important contributions made by the GNU Project and the principles of freedom upon which they are founded. Debian has chosen to follow this recommendation, and, thus, name its distributions accordingly (thus, the latest stable release is Debian GNU/Linux 8).

Source: https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-handbook/sect.why-gnu-linux.en.html

riveravaldez (talk) 13:43, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nowhere. It is directly from Stallman and his position is already documented in the article, plus this is already mentioned in the lead section. - Ahunt (talk) 14:52, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"GNU/Linux" naming controversy?

With the official Wikipedia stance being that the OS should be known as Linux, doesn't the naming of this article provide an obvious bias? If you're trying to indicate the two naming options without bias, the page should be "'GNU/Linux'/'Linux' naming controversy". If you're trying to simply state the name of the OS, it should be named "Linux naming controversy". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.81.121.138 (talk) 01:49, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. "Controversy" is already a very generous term to describe the fact that a tiny, vocal and self-righteous minority wants to change the way everyone else refers to what has always been and will always be the Linux operating system. Period.185.23.220.233 (talk) 10:12, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The point is that Linux began as an operating system kernel, and a lot of GNU software was, and still is used to make a bootable system. Of course, over time, other components were added by other people, but there really is no "Linux Operating System". There are various distributions, all which provide a customized kernel, GNU components, and a bunch of other stuff. A given distribution (e.g. Ubuntu, Arch) forms an operating system. - Tystnaden (talk) 19:04, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you're contributing to the discussion. Read the article. The OS widely called Linux started years before Linux kernel and was called GNU. Some people believe that we should keep calling it that way, but also take into consideration, that you can put different kernels into GNU, and that kernel is a big part of whole OS. That's why GNU/Linux exists as a name. — K4rolB (talk) 20:30, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe "Linux vs. GNU/Linux naming controversy"? Otherwise it becomes really littered with quote marks and slashes. Although I feel the current name gives a feel of the article just right and I don't consider any name change too necessary. — K4rolB (talk) 20:30, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
All the more reason for the title of the article to be simply "Linux naming controversy". No clutter and no undue weight for fringe POVs, like the one you yourself blatantly espouse above.185.23.220.233 (talk) 11:17, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Except for the fact that the term "Linux" used in this context is not controversial, the name "GNU/Linux" is. The article is named for the controversy not for "not the controversy". - Ahunt (talk) 12:35, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GNU/Linux, Linux, or GNU?

I added that it's 'GNU/Linux,' 'Linux' or 'GNU,' but someone removed 'GNU.' Some Free/Libre/Opensource Software (FLOSS) people in their discussion areas call it GNU. Most the original software was GNU, and even the Linux kernel is under the GNU General Public License. Much the other software does also. The Free Software Foundation (FSF) that started the GNU project also calls it the GNU operating system in some cases. Is there a way I could cite a conversation with someone to prove people also argue for calling it GNU, or cite the FSF site or their founder? Richard Stallman says for the Church of Emacs 'there is no system but GNU, and Linux is one of its kernels'... so I tend to this alternative idea, that all of them are simply GNU operating systems.--206.63.237.146 (talk) 23:40, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]