Misplaced Pages

GNU/Linux naming controversy: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 05:10, 22 March 2005 edit65.34.186.143 (talk) note the usage of Linux code← Previous edit Latest revision as of 14:12, 16 November 2024 edit undoAnomieBOT (talk | contribs)Bots6,574,397 editsm Dating maintenance tags: {{Primary sources}} 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Issues of what to call a system with the GNU toolchain and the Linux kernel}}
{{multiple image
| total_width = 330
| image1 = Tux.svg
| height1 = 317.2
| caption1 = ], mascot of the ]
| image2 = Heckert_GNU_white.svg
| height2 = 330
| caption2 = Official logo employed by the ]
}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=January 2014}}


The '''GNU/Linux naming controversy''' is a controversy regarding whether ] that use ] software and the ] should be referred to as "GNU/Linux" or "Linux" systems.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Noyes |first=Katherine |date=2012-05-10 |title=To GNU or Not to GNU? That Is the Question |url=https://www.linuxinsider.com/story/75073.html |access-date=2023-01-13 |website=www.linuxinsider.com |language=en |archive-date=17 July 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190717161818/https://www.linuxinsider.com/story/75073.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>


Proponents of the term ''Linux'' argue that it is far more commonly used by the public and media<ref name="MakeUseOf">{{Cite news |last=Kurp |first=Abraham |date=July 2008 |title=Learning The Linux Lingo |work=MakeUseOf |url=http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/learning-linux-lingo/ |access-date=10 April 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090308081934/http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/learning-linux-lingo/ |archive-date=8 March 2009}}</ref><ref name="OReilly">{{cite news | url = http://linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2005/10/06/what-is-linux.html | title = What Is Linux | access-date = 10 April 2011 | last = Siever | first = Ellen |date=June 2005 | work = Linux Dev Center | publisher = O'Reilly |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20060718110305/http://linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2005/10/06/what-is-linux.html|archive-date = 18 July 2006}}</ref> and that it serves as a generic term for systems that combine that kernel with software from multiple other sources,<ref>{{ cite book | last = Eckert | first = Jason W. | year = 2012 | title = Linux+ Guide to Linux Certification | edition = Third | publisher = Cengage Learning | place = Boston, Massachusetts | page = 33 | isbn = 978-1111541538 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=EHLH4S78LmsC&pg=PA33 | access-date = April 14, 2013 | quote = The shared commonality of the kernel is what defines a system's membership in the Linux family; the differing ] applications that can interact with the common kernel are what differentiate ]s. | url-status = live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20130509031220/http://books.google.com/books?id=EHLH4S78LmsC&pg=PA33 | archive-date = May 9, 2013 | df = mdy-all }}</ref> while proponents of the term ''GNU/Linux'' note that ''GNU'' alone would be just as good a name for ] which combine the ] software with software from other sources.<ref>{{Cite book|title=How Open is the Future?: Economic, Social & Cultural Scenarios Inspired by Free & Open-source Software|last1=Wynants|first1=Marleen|last2=Cornelis|first2=Jan|date=2005|publisher=Asp / Vubpress / Upa|isbn=9789054873785|pages=71|language=en}}</ref>
] artwork of the ] (GNU mascot) and the ] ] (Linux kernel mascot) representing "GNU/Linux". The ], which is used by Linux as well as most GNU software, armors both characters.]]


The term ''GNU/Linux'' is promoted by the ] (FSF) and its founder ].<ref name="linuxandgnu" /> Their reasoning is that the ] was the main contributor for not only many of the operating system components used in the subsequent development of modern "Linux" systems, but also the associated ].<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" /> Several ] of operating systems containing the ] use the name that the FSF prefers, such as ],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.debian.org/intro/about|title=About Debian|publisher=Debian|access-date=22 February 2017}}</ref> ]<ref>{{cite web|url=https://trisquel.info/|title=Trisquel GNU/Linux|access-date=22 February 2017}}</ref> and ].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.parabola.nu/|title=Parabola GNU/Linux-libre|access-date=22 February 2017}}</ref> Others claim that GNU/Linux is a useful name to make a distinction between those and Linux distributions such as ] and ].
'''GNU/Linux''' is the term promoted by the ] (FSF), its founder ], and its supporters, for what is commonly called "]" &mdash; that is, implementations of the FSF's ] ] that use the ].


== History ==
For historical and other reasons, most people use the term "Linux" for the whole system, one notable exception being ] GNU/Linux.
In 1983, ], founder of the ], set forth plans of a complete ] ], called ], composed entirely of ]. In September of that year, Stallman published a manifesto in '']'' detailing his new project publicly, outlining his vision of ].<ref name="handbookonopensource">{{cite book|first1=Kirk|last1=St.Amant|first2=Brian|last2=Still|title=Handbook of Research on Open Source Software: Technological, Economic, and Social Perspectives|year=2007|publisher=Information Science Reference |isbn=978-1591409991}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|date=17 November 2008|title=Q&A: Richard Stallman, founder of the GNU Project and the Free Software Foundation|url=https://www.itnews.com.au/news/qa-richard-stallman-founder-of-the-gnu-project-and-the-free-software-foundation-128452|access-date=2021-07-31|website=iTnews}}</ref> Software development work began in January 1984. By 1991, the GNU mid-level portions of the operating system were almost complete, and the upper level could be supplied by the ], but the lower level (], device drivers, system-level utilities and ]) was still mostly lacking.


The kernel officially developed by GNU was called ]. The Hurd followed an ambitious ] design, which proved unexpectedly difficult to implement early on. However, in 1991, ] independently released the first version of the Linux kernel. Early Linux developers ] GNU code, including the ], to run with Linux, while the free software community adopted the use of the Linux kernel as the missing kernel for the GNU operating system. This work filled the remaining gaps in providing a completely free operating system.<ref name=":1" />
The main argument for "GNU/Linux" is that ]' kernel was only the final small part of an otherwise complete system, GNU, written and assembled over many years with the explicit goal of creating an integrated free operating system.


Over the next few years, several suggestions arose for naming operating systems using the Linux kernel and GNU components. In 1992, the ] distribution adopted the name "Linux/GNU/]". In ] and mailing-list discussions, one can find usages of "GNU/Linux" as early as 1992,<ref>{{ cite newsgroup | url = https://groups.google.com/group/comp.unix.misc/msg/698d1e2b49c5854e | title = Re: ANNOUNCEMENT: Alpha release Linux/GNU/X ... | newsgroup = comp.unix.misc | date = 26 November 1992 | author = Jamie Mazer | access-date = 3 February 2008 }}</ref> and of "GNU+Linux" as early as 1993.<ref>{{ cite newsgroup | url = https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux/msg/dcf89e95ca953b69 | title = The free software myth and the commercial myth | newsgroup = comp.os.linux | date = 18 May 1993 | author = Rodrigo Vanegas | access-date = 3 February 2008 }}</ref> The ] project, which was at one time sponsored by the ], switched to calling its product "Debian GNU/Linux" in early 1994.<ref name="OReilly" /><ref>{{ cite newsgroup | url = https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.misc/msg/4c19177c383c9b21 | title = Linux/GNU in EE Times | newsgroup = comp.os.linux.misc | date = 12 May 1994 | author = Stephen Benson |message-id= 178@scribendum.win-uk.net | access-date = 31 January 2008 }}</ref><ref></ref><ref name="rebelcode">{{cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kIU1scm4w6QC&pg=PT100 | title=Rebel Code: Linux And The Open Source Revolution | publisher=] | author=Moody, Glyn | author-link=Glyn Moody | year=2002 | isbn=978-0738206707}}</ref>
The disagreement over the naming is related to a general debate over the primary purpose of free software: the ], led by the FSF, emphasizes the "free" (as in freedom) aspect of software as an important right akin to ], in contrast with the ]'s argument that higher-] software is the main goal. The FSF argues that the "GNU/Linux" name is important to credit the importance of their philosophy in addition to their technical work.
This change followed a request by Richard Stallman (who initially proposed "LiGNUx," but suggested "GNU/Linux" instead after hearing complaints about the awkwardness of the former term).<ref name="faif2">{{cite book |last1=Williams |first1=Sam |last2=Stallman |first2=Richard M. |date=2010 |title=Free as in Freedom 2.0 |url=https://static.fsf.org/nosvn/faif-2.0.pdf |publisher=GNU Press |page=151 |isbn=978-0-9831592-1-6 }}</ref> GNU's June 1994 ''Bulletin'' described "Linux" as a "free ] system for ] machines" (with "many of the utilities and libraries" from GNU),<ref>{{cite web | url = https://www.gnu.org/bulletins/bull17.html | title = GNU's Bulletin, vol. 1 no. 17 }}</ref> but the January 1995 ''Bulletin'' switched to the term "GNU/Linux" instead.<ref>{{cite web | url = https://www.gnu.org/bulletins/bull18.html | title = GNU's Bulletin, vol. 1 no. 18 }}</ref>


Stallman's and the FSF's efforts to include "GNU" in the name started around 1994, but were reportedly mostly via private communications (such as the above-mentioned request to Debian) until 1996.<ref>{{cite mailing list|url=https://lkml.org/lkml/2003/1/12/55 |author=Richard Stallman |title=Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers? |mailing-list=linux-kernel |date=12 January 2003 |publisher=Lkml.org |access-date=22 June 2011}}</ref><ref>{{ cite newsgroup | url = https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.misc/msg/1241a2919efc4bc3 | title = Linux is a GNU system and the DWARF support | newsgroup = comp.os.linux.misc | date = 8 September 1994 | author = Matt Welsh | access-date = 3 February 2008 | quote = RMS's idea (which I have heard first-hand) is that Linux systems should be considered GNU systems with Linux as the kernel. }}</ref> In May 1996, Stallman released ] 19.31 with the ] system target "linux" changed to "lignux" (shortly thereafter changed to "linux-gnu" in emacs 19.32),<ref>{{cite web|last1=Stallman|first1=Richard|title=emacs-19.31-19.32.diff-1|url=https://ftp.gnu.org/old-gnu/emacs/emacs-19.31-19.32.diff.gz|access-date=21 March 2017|pages=line 151–155}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{cite web|last1=Stallman|first1=Richard|title=GNU/Linux FAQ|url=https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html#long}}</ref> and included an essay "Linux and the GNU system"<ref>{{cite web|last1=Stallman|first1=Richard|title=Linux and The GNU system|url=https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html|website=gnu.org|access-date=21 March 2017}}</ref> suggesting that people use the terms "Linux-based GNU system" (or "GNU/Linux system" or "Lignux" for short). He later used "GNU/Linux" exclusively, and the essay was superseded by Stallman's 1997 essay, "Linux and the GNU System".<ref name="linuxandgnu">{{cite web|url=https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html|title=Linux and the GNU System|last=Stallman|first=Richard|author-link=Richard Stallman|publisher=Gnu.org|access-date=22 June 2011}}</ref>
The controversy is also a reflection of a wider confusion between Linux the kernel and Linux the operating system as a whole &mdash; of which the kernel is typically only a small part.


== Composition of operating systems ==
==History==
Modern ] and ] operating systems are composed of software by many different authors, including the Linux kernel developers, the GNU project, and other vendors such as those behind the ]. Desktop and server-based distributions use GNU software such as the ] (glibc), ] (coreutils), ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], and the ] shell.


In a 2002 analysis of the source code for ] 7.1, a typical ], the total size of the packages from the GNU project was found to be much larger than the Linux kernel.<ref>{{cite web | author = David A. Wheeler | url = http://www.dwheeler.com/sloc/redhat71-v1/redhat71sloc.html | title = More Than a Gigabuck: Estimating GNU/Linux's Size | date = 29 July 2002 | quote = the total of the GNU project's code is much larger than the Linux kernel's size. Thus, by comparing the total contributed effort, it's certainly justifiable to call the entire system ''GNU/Linux'' and not just ''Linux''. }}</ref> Later, a 2011 analysis of the ] distribution's "Natty" release main repository found that 8% to 13% of it consisted of GNU components (the range depending on whether ] is considered part of GNU), while only 6% is taken by the Linux kernel (9% when including its direct dependencies).<ref name="pedrocr-gnu">{{cite web |url=http://pedrocr.pt/text/how-much-gnu-in-gnu-linux/ |title=How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux? |work=Split Perspective |last=Côrte-Real |first=Pedro |date=31 May 2011}} (] data)</ref> Determining exactly what constitutes the "operating system" ''per se'' is a matter of continuing debate.<ref name=":0" />
The history of Linux is closely tied to that of ], which began the development of a complete ] operating system composed entirely of ] in January ]. By ], when the first version of the Linux kernel was released, the GNU operating system was almost complete. However, their kernel, ], was still in its infancy. The early Linux kernel developers adapted Linux specifically to work with the GNU ]. Linux thus filled the last major gap in the GNU operating system.


On the other hand, some ], such as ]s and ]s (like Google's ]), ]s (routers), and ] devices, are engineered with space efficiency in mind and use a Linux kernel with few or no components of GNU, due to perceived issues surrounding ], and impeded performance.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Torvalds|first=Linus|date=9 January 2002|title=Posting to the glibc mailing list|url=http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2002-01/msg00079.html|access-date=August 30, 2021}}</ref> A system running ] is likely to substitute ] for glibc, and ] for coreutils. Google's Linux-based Android operating system does not use any GNU components or libraries, using Google's own ]-based ] C library in place of glibc. The FSF agrees that "GNU/Linux" is not an appropriate name for these systems.<ref name="fsf-faq"/><ref>], , blog post (4 November 2009).</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Paul |first=Ryan |url=https://arstechnica.com/open-source/reviews/2009/02/an-introduction-to-google-android-for-developers.ars |title=Dream(sheep++): A developer's introduction to Google Android |publisher=Arstechnica.com |date=23 February 2009 |access-date=22 June 2011}}</ref>
The Hurd followed an ambitious design which proved unexpectedly difficult to implement, arguably being evidence against the supposed advantages of a ] design over the ] ] approach used in Linux. The Hurd is marginally usable and has limited hardware support, so most GNU project contributors use the Linux kernel. Notably without giving credit in the Hurd OS name, Linux kernel code has been used to supply the Hurd with networking, hardware drivers, and filesystem drivers. Given the amount of Linux code found in the Hurd, GNU/Linux might be more appropriate as the name of a Hurd system.


There are also systems that use a GNU userspace and/or ] library on top of a non-Linux kernel, for example ] (GNU userland on the GNU kernel)<ref> web page, and web page. (Accessed June 2013.)</ref> or ] (which uses the GNU coreutils and C library with the kernel from ]).<ref> web page (accessed June 2013).</ref>
In 1992, the ] distribution adopted the name "Linux/GNU/X". The name "GNU/Linux" was first used by ] in ]. In GNU's June ] ''Bulletin'', Linux is referred to as a "free ] clone (with many GNU utilities and libraries)". In the January ] edition, the term "GNU/Linux" was used instead. In May ], Stallman released ] 19.31 with the system target "Linux" changed to "Lignux", also suggesting the alternatives of "Linux-based GNU system" or "GNU/Linux system". Stallman later used "GNU/Linux" exclusively.


== Opinions ==
==Arguments for "GNU/Linux"==


{{Primary sources|section|date=November 2024}}
The FSF advocates "GNU/Linux" not simply because of the large number of GNU components used in Linux-based systems or the quantity of GNU ], but because the goal of the GNU project was specifically to develop a complete operating system:


=== GNU/Linux ===
:''So if you were going to pick a name for the system based on who wrote the programs in the system, the most appropriate single choice would be ''GNU''. But we don't think that is the right way to consider the question. The GNU Project was not, is not, a project to develop specific software packages. '''' Many people have made major contributions to the free software in the system, and they all deserve credit. But the reason it is an integrated system &mdash; and not just a collection of useful programs &mdash; is because the GNU Project set out to make it one. We made a list of the programs needed to make a complete free system, and we systematically wrote, or found people to write, everything on the list.'' (Stallman, "Linux and the GNU Project")
] artwork of the ] (GNU mascot) and the penguin ] (mascot of the Linux kernel) representing their viewpoint on "GNU/Linux". The ] (GPL), which is used by the Linux kernel as well as by most GNU software, armors both characters.]]


The FSF justifies the name "GNU/Linux" primarily on the grounds that the GNU project was specifically developing a complete system, of which they argue that the Linux kernel filled one of the final gaps;<ref name="linux-and-gnu"/> the large number of GNU components and GNU ] used in such systems is a secondary argument:
The FSF argues that the name issue is important as a way of crediting both the technical contribution of the GNU project and the idealism of the GNU free-software philosophy:


{{ quote
:''Calling the system GNU/Linux recognizes the role that our idealism played in building our community, and helps the public recognize the practical importance of these ideals.'' (FSF, "GNU/Linux FAQ")
| So if you were going to pick a name for the system based on who wrote the programs in the system, the most appropriate single choice would be ''GNU''. But we don't think that is the right way to consider the question. The GNU Project was not, is not, a project to develop specific software packages. '''' Many people have made major contributions to the free software in the system, and they all deserve credit. But the reason it is an integrated system—and not just a collection of useful programs—is because the GNU Project set out to make it one. We made a list of the programs needed to make a complete free system, and we systematically wrote, or found people to write, everything on the list.
|Richard Stallman<ref name="linux-and-gnu">{{cite web|url=https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html |title=Richard Stallman, "Linux and the GNU Project" |publisher=] |access-date=22 June 2011}}</ref>
}}


Other arguments include that the name "GNU/Linux" recognizes the role that the free-software movement played in building modern ],<ref name="fsf-faq">{{cite web |url=https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html |title=GNU/Linux FAQ by Richard Stallman}}</ref> that the GNU project played a larger role in developing ] and software for ],<ref name="linuxandgnu" /><ref name=":1" /> and that using the word "Linux" to refer to the Linux kernel, the operating system and entire distributions of software leads to confusion on the differences about the three. Because of this confusion, legal threats and ] campaigns apparently directed against the kernel, such as those launched by the ] or the ] (AdTI), have been misinterpreted by many commentators who assume that the whole operating system is being targeted. SCO and the AdTI have even been accused of deliberately exploiting this confusion.<ref>{{cite web | title = SCO-Caldera v IBM | url = http://www.mozillaquest.com/Linux03/ScoSource-10_Story01.html | author = Mike Angelo | date = 28 April 2003 | quote = Generally, SCO's ] is vague and confusing as to whether the accusations involve the Linux kernel, the GNU/Linux operating system, Linux distributions, Linux applications, or whatever. | access-date = 12 June 2004 | archive-date = 14 September 2010 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20100914070329/http://www.mozillaquest.com/Linux03/ScoSource-10_Story01.html | url-status = dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | quote = SCO has used "Linux" to mean "all free software", or "all free software constituting a UNIX-like operating system." This confusion, which the Free Software Foundation warned against in the past, is here shown to have the misleading consequences the Foundation has often predicted | author = Eben Moglen | author-link = Eben Moglen | date = 27 June 2003 | url = http://www.fsf.org/licensing/sco/sco-v-ibm.html | title = FSF Statement on SCO v IBM] }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | quote = In particular, Stallman criticized the <nowiki>]/AdTI<nowiki>]</nowiki> report for capitalizing on common confusion between the Linux kernel, which Stallman says "Linus really wrote", with the full GNU operating system and associated software, which can be and generally is used with the Linux kernel. | author = Lisa Stapleton | publisher = LinuxInsider | url = http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/34069.html | title = Stallman: Accusatory Report Deliberately Confuses | date = 27 May 2004 }}</ref>
The ordinary understanding of "operating system" includes both the kernel &mdash; the specific subsystem that directly interfaces with the hardware &mdash; and the "]" software that is employed by the user and by application software to control the computer. Moreover, both the name "GNU" and the name "Linux" are intentionally related to the name "Unix", and Unix has always conceptually included the ] ] and userland tools as well as the kernel. In the ] release notes for versions 0.01 to 0.11 of Linux (which was not released under the ] until version 0.12), Torvalds wrote:


Regarding suggestions that renaming efforts stem from egotism or personal pique, Stallman has responded that his interest is not in giving credit to himself but to the GNU Project: "Some people think that it's because I want my ego to be fed. Of course, I'm not asking you to call it 'Stallmanix'."<ref name="stallman-transcript">{{cite web |url=https://www.gnu.org/events/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.html |title=Transcript of Richard M. Stallman's speech, "Free Software: Freedom and Cooperation", given at New York University in New York, NY, on 29 May 2001}}</ref> In response to another common suggestion that many people have contributed to the system and that a short name cannot credit all of them, the FSF has argued that this cannot justify calling the system "Linux", since they believe that the GNU project's contribution was ultimately greater than that of the Linux kernel in these related systems.<ref name=":1" /><ref name="pedrocr-gnu" />
:''Sadly, a kernel by itself gets you nowhere. To get a working system you need a shell, compilers, a library etc. These are separate parts and may be under a stricter (or even looser) copyright. Most of the tools used with linux are GNU software and are under the GNU copyleft. These tools aren't in the distribution &mdash; ask me (or GNU) for more info.''


In 2010, Stallman stated that naming is not simply a matter of giving equal mention to the GNU Project, saying that because the system is more widely referred as "Linux", people tend to "think it's all Linux, that it was all started by Mr. Torvalds in 1991, and they think it all comes from his vision of life, and that's the really bad problem."<ref name="torvalds-role">{{cite web|date=26 July 2010|title=Richard Stallman talk+Q&A at the useR! 2010 conference (audio files attached)|url=https://www.r-statistics.com/2010/07/richard-stallman-talkqa-at-the-user-2010-conference-audio-files-attached/|work=R-statistics blog}}</ref>
The use of the word "Linux" to refer to the kernel, the operating system, and entire ]s, often leads to confusion about the distinctions between the three. Many of the ] are typically included as part of a GNU/Linux distribution. Media sources frequently make erroneous statements such as claiming that the entire Linux operating system (rather than simply the kernel) was written from scratch by Torvalds in 1991; that Torvalds directs the development of other components such as graphical interfaces or the GNU tools; or that new releases of the kernel involve a similar degree of user-visible change as do new versions of proprietary operating systems such as ], where many things besides the kernel change simultaneously.


], developer and security chair of ], has stated that in her opinion GNU/Linux is the correct name when referring to Linux distributions that are based on ] and ], such as ] and ]. This can be contrasted to other Linux distributions which are based on ] (]) and ] (Alpine).<ref>{{Cite web |last=Conill |first=Ariadne |date=2022-03-30 |title=it is correct to refer to GNU/Linux as GNU/Linux |url=https://ariadne.space/2022/03/30/it-is-correct-to-refer-to-gnu/linux-as-gnu/linux/}}</ref>
Because of this confusion, legal threats and ] campaigns apparently directed against the kernel, such as those launched by the ] or the ] (AdTI), have been misinterpreted by many commentators who assume that the whole operating system is being targeted. These organisations have even been accused of deliberately exploiting this confusion:


=== Linux ===
:''Generally, SCO's ] is vague and confusing as to whether the accusations involve the Linux kernel, the GNU/Linux operating system, Linux distributions, Linux applications, or whatever.'' (Mike Angelo, ''MozillaQuest Magazine'', 28 April 2003).
Proponents of naming the operating systems "Linux" state that "Linux" is used far more often than "GNU/Linux".<ref name="MakeUseOf" /><ref name="OReilly" />


] writes (in the "Linux" entry of the ]):
:''SCO has used "Linux" to mean "all free software," or "all free software constituting a UNIX-like operating system." This confusion, which the Free Software Foundation warned against in the past, is here shown to have the misleading consequences the Foundation has often predicted.'' (], FSF Statement on SCO v IBM, 25 June 2003).


{{ quote
:''In particular, Stallman criticized the'' <nowiki>]/AdTI<nowiki>]</nowiki> ''report for capitalizing on common confusion between the Linux kernel, which Stallman says "Linus really wrote," with the full GNU operating system and associated software, which can be and generally is used with the Linux kernel.'' (Lisa Stapleton, ''LinuxInsider'', 27 May 2004).
|Some people object that the name "Linux" should be used to refer only to the kernel, not the entire operating system. This claim is a proxy for an underlying territorial dispute; people who insist on the term GNU/Linux want the FSF to get most of the credit for Linux because and friends wrote many of its user-level tools. Neither this theory nor the term GNU/Linux has gained more than minority acceptance.
}}


When Linus Torvalds was asked in the documentary '']'' whether the name "GNU/Linux" was justified, he replied:
==Arguments for "Linux"==


{{ quote
"Linux" is by far the most widespread name, and most people therefore simply adopt this usage, while references to the naming controversy appear only infrequently in mainstream sources. "Linux" has the most historical momentum because it is the name Torvalds has used for the combined system since 1991, while Stallman only began asking people to call the system "GNU/Linux" in the mid ], some time after the "Linux" name had already become popular. "Linux" is shorter and easier to say than "GNU/Linux".
|Well, I think it's justified, but it's justified if you actually make a GNU distribution of Linux&nbsp;... the same way that I think that "Red Hat Linux" is fine, or "SUSE Linux" or "Debian Linux", because if you actually make your own distribution of Linux, you get to name the thing, but calling Linux in general "GNU Linux" I think is just ridiculous.<ref>{{ cite video | people = Moore, J.T.S. (Produced, Written, and Directed) | title = ] | medium = DVD | date = 2001 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | title=Linus Torvalds, Linux, GNU/Linux |website = ]| date=3 September 2009 | url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZlOCHYu1Vk }}</ref>}}


An earlier comment by Torvalds on the naming controversy was:
] writes (in the "Linux" entry of the ]):


{{ quote
:''Some people object that the name "Linux" should be used to refer only to the kernel, not the entire operating system. This claim is a proxy for an underlying territorial dispute; people who insist on the term GNU/Linux want the FSF to get most of the credit for Linux because RMS'' ''and friends wrote many of its user-level tools. Neither this theory nor the term GNU/Linux has gained more than minority acceptance.''
| Umm, this discussion has gone on quite long enough, thank you very much. It doesn't really matter what people call Linux, as long as credit is given where credit is due (on both sides). Personally, I'll very much continue to call it "Linux",&nbsp;...


The GNU people tried calling it GNU/Linux, and that's ok. It's certainly no worse a name than "Linux Pro" or "Red Hat Linux" or
Some feel that Stallman's advocacy of the combined name is an attempt to unfairly ride on the coattails of Linux's fame. An editorial in the ''Linux Journal'' (#30, Oct. 1996) speculated:
"Slackware Linux"&nbsp;...


Lignux is just a punny name—I think Linux/GNU or GNU/Linux is a bit more "professional"&nbsp;...<ref>{{cite newsgroup |url=https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.misc/msg/7781d4221fceedb2 |author=Linus Torvalds |title=Lignux, what's the matter with you people? |newsgroup=comp.os.linux.misc |date=3 June 1996}}</ref>
:''Perhaps RMS is frustrated because Linus got the glory for what RMS wanted to do.''
}}


The name "GNU/Linux," particularly when using Stallman's preferred pronunciation, has been criticized for its perceived clumsiness and verbosity,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.howtogeek.com/139287/the-great-debate-is-it-linux-or-gnulinux/ |title= The Great Debate: Is it Linux or GNU/Linux? |last=Hoffman |first=Chris |date= 4 March 2013 |access-date=2016-12-22 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://everything2.com/user/ssd/writeups/It%2527s+GNU%252FLinux%253B+stop+calling+it+%2522Linux%2522 |title=It's GNU/Linux; stop calling it "Linux" (idea) |date=2001-04-28 |access-date=2016-12-19 }}</ref> a factor that Torvalds has cited as the downfall of operating systems such as ].<ref>{{cite web| url= http://groups.google.com/group/comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit/msg/80bb74847934edc7 | title= Post | work = comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit | publisher = Google Groups | date= 1993-03-16 | author =Torvalds, Linus| access-date=2011-02-19 | quote=No. That's it. The cool name, that is. We worked very hard on creating a name that would appeal to the majority of people, and it certainly paid off: thousands of people are using linux just to be able to say "OS/2? Hah. I've got Linux. What a cool name". 386BSD made the mistake of putting a lot of numbers and weird abbreviations into the name, and is scaring away a lot of people just because it sounds too technical.}}</ref>
The same article quotes Linus Torvalds as saying:


The '']'' speculated that Stallman's advocacy of the combined name stems from frustration that "Linus got the glory for what wanted to do."<ref>{{cite web | url = http://linux4u.jinr.ru/usoft/WWW/LJ/issue30/issue30.html#ftp30 | title = From the Publisher: On the Politics of Freedom | publisher = ] No. 30 (October 1996) | quote = Perhaps RMS is frustrated because Linus got the glory for what RMS wanted to do. | access-date = 12 June 2004 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20041208112435/http://linux4u.jinr.ru/usoft/WWW/LJ/issue30/issue30.html#ftp30 | archive-date = 8 December 2004 | url-status = dead }}</ref>
:''Umm, this discussion has gone on quite long enough, thank you very much. It doesn't really matter what people call Linux, as long as credit is given where credit is due (on both sides). Personally, I'll very much continue to call it "Linux".''


Others have suggested that, regardless of the merits, Stallman's persistence in what sometimes seems a lost cause makes him and GNU look bad. For example, ] (author of ], once used to manage Linux kernel development) opined that "claiming credit only makes one look foolish and greedy".<ref>{{cite mailing list |url=http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9904.0/0301.html |author=Larry McVoy |title=Re: GNU/Linux |mailing-list=linux-kernel |date=3 April 1999 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120629031248/http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9904.0/0301.html |archive-date=29 June 2012 |df=dmy-all }}</ref>
In a similar vein, the debate over the name for the operating system is sometimes characterized as a trivial distraction; e.g. ] (''PC Magazine'', 5 March 2002) wrote:


Many users and vendors who prefer the name "Linux," such as ], one of the original developers of the ], point to the inclusion of non-GNU, non-kernel tools, such as ], ], and ], in end-user operating systems based on the Linux kernel:
:''Unfortunately, the Linux community spends too much of its energy on things such as nomenclature (like the name GNU/Linux versus Linux).''


{{ quote
Many users and vendors who prefer the name "]" point to the inclusion of non-GNU, non-kernel tools such as the ], the ] or the ] in end-user operating systems based on the Linux kernel. No single name can comprehensively acknowledge the thousands of developers and projects that have contributed to a complete distribution &mdash; GNU is only one of those, albeit a pivotal one. Linux thus serves as a convenient ] for a complete OS distribution. The ] acknowledges the limits to credits in naming, albeit without drawing the same conclusion:
| There are lots of people on this bus; I don't hear a clamor of support that GNU is more essential than many of the other components; can't take a wheel away, and end up with a functional vehicle, or an engine, or the seats. I recommend you be happy we have a bus.<ref>{{cite mailing list |url=http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9904.0/0497.html |author=Jim Gettys |title=Re: GNU/Linux |mailing-list=linux-kernel |date=5 April 1999 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120806004757/http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9904.0/0497.html |archive-date=6 August 2012 |df=dmy-all }}</ref>
}}


== See also ==
:''Since a long name such as GNU/X11/Apache/Linux/TeX/Perl/Python/FreeCiv becomes absurd, at some point you will have to set a threshold and omit the names of the many other secondary contributions. There is no one obvious right place to set the threshold, so wherever you set it, we won't argue against it.'' <nowiki></nowiki> ''But one name that cannot result from concerns of fairness and giving credit, not for any possible threshold level, is "Linux". It can't be fair to give all the credit to one secondary contribution (Linux) while omitting the principal contribution (GNU).'' (FSF, "GNU/Linux FAQ")
{{Portal|Free and open-source software}}
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]


== References ==
In mainstream usage, the name "Linux" on its own is often used as the standard example of the concept of software or other content that may be freely modified and redistributed, even if such usages generally do not mention GNU or "free software" specifically.
{{Reflist|30em}}


== External links ==
==Cases where "GNU/Linux" is inapplicable==
* (or "What's in a name?"), by Richard Stallman
* , also by Richard Stallman
*
* , by Richard Stallman, 2013
*
* , Zagreb, 2006
* , by Josh Mehlman, ''ZDNet Australia'', 7 July 2004
* {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161118013352/http://www.debian.org/releases/wheezy/amd64/ch01s02.html.en |date=18 November 2016 }}, Debian Project


{{Linux}}
In rare cases, the Linux kernel is used with few or no components of GNU (''e.g.'' an application running directly on a nearly "bare" kernel, or with ] and ] in place of the GNU tools). These are typically small ]s, such as dedicated ] products or other appliances. Everyone, including the FSF, agrees that "GNU/Linux" is not an appropriate name in such circumstances. Almost all Linux-based desktops and servers do use the GNU components, especially ], the GNU C Library.
{{GNU}}


{{DEFAULTSORT:GNU Linux naming controversy}}
==Pronunciation==
]

]
Although "GNU/Linux" is often pronounced "GNU Linux", Richard Stallman has advocated explicit pronunciation of the slash to prevent the confusing implication that the Linux kernel itself is a GNU project:
]

]
:''I prefer to pronounce it GNU-slash-Linux, or GNU-plus-Linux. The reason is that when you say GNU-Linux it is very much prone to suggest a misleading interpretation. After all, we have GNU Emacs which is the version of Emacs which was developed for GNU. If you say "GNU Linux", people will think it means a version of Linux that was developed for GNU. Which is not the fact.'' (''KernelTrap.org'', 2005).
]

]
==See also==

*]
*]
*]
*]
*]

==External links and references==

* (Richard Stallman)
*, the Free Software Foundation's responses to common objections to the "GNU/Linux" name
* (Eric S. Raymond, ''The Jargon File'')
* (essays by Richard Stallman, Eben Moglen and others regarding SCO and GNU/Linux)
* (Craig Burley, ] ''gnu.misc.discuss'', 30 May 1996)
* (''Slashdot'', 9 April 1999)
* (Richard Stallman)

===Press===

* (''Linux Journal'' #30, Oct 1996)
* (Richard Stallman, ''ZDNet'', 12 October 2000)
* (John C. Dvorak, ''PC Magazine'', 5 March 2002)
* (''PCLinuxOnline'', 26 October 2002)
* (Mike Angelo, ''MozillaQuest Magazine'', 28 April 2003)
* (Timothy R. Butler, ''Open for Business'', 25 August 2003)
* (Lisa Stapleton, ''LinuxInsider'', 27 May 2004)
* (Josh Mehlman, ''ZDNet Australia'', 7 July 2004)
* (Jeremy Andrews, ''KernelTrap.org'', 4 Jan. 2005).

]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 14:12, 16 November 2024

Issues of what to call a system with the GNU toolchain and the Linux kernel Tux, mascot of the Linux KernelOfficial logo employed by the GNU Project

The GNU/Linux naming controversy is a controversy regarding whether computer operating systems that use GNU software and the Linux kernel should be referred to as "GNU/Linux" or "Linux" systems.

Proponents of the term Linux argue that it is far more commonly used by the public and media and that it serves as a generic term for systems that combine that kernel with software from multiple other sources, while proponents of the term GNU/Linux note that GNU alone would be just as good a name for GNU variants which combine the GNU operating system software with software from other sources.

The term GNU/Linux is promoted by the Free Software Foundation (FSF) and its founder Richard Stallman. Their reasoning is that the GNU project was the main contributor for not only many of the operating system components used in the subsequent development of modern "Linux" systems, but also the associated free software philosophy. Several distributions of operating systems containing the Linux kernel use the name that the FSF prefers, such as Debian, Trisquel and Parabola GNU/Linux-libre. Others claim that GNU/Linux is a useful name to make a distinction between those and Linux distributions such as Android and Alpine Linux.

History

In 1983, Richard Stallman, founder of the Free Software Foundation, set forth plans of a complete Unix-like operating system, called GNU, composed entirely of free software. In September of that year, Stallman published a manifesto in Dr. Dobb's Journal detailing his new project publicly, outlining his vision of free software. Software development work began in January 1984. By 1991, the GNU mid-level portions of the operating system were almost complete, and the upper level could be supplied by the X Window System, but the lower level (kernel, device drivers, system-level utilities and daemons) was still mostly lacking.

The kernel officially developed by GNU was called GNU Hurd. The Hurd followed an ambitious microkernel design, which proved unexpectedly difficult to implement early on. However, in 1991, Linus Torvalds independently released the first version of the Linux kernel. Early Linux developers ported GNU code, including the GNU C Compiler, to run with Linux, while the free software community adopted the use of the Linux kernel as the missing kernel for the GNU operating system. This work filled the remaining gaps in providing a completely free operating system.

Over the next few years, several suggestions arose for naming operating systems using the Linux kernel and GNU components. In 1992, the Yggdrasil Linux distribution adopted the name "Linux/GNU/X". In Usenet and mailing-list discussions, one can find usages of "GNU/Linux" as early as 1992, and of "GNU+Linux" as early as 1993. The Debian project, which was at one time sponsored by the Free Software Foundation, switched to calling its product "Debian GNU/Linux" in early 1994. This change followed a request by Richard Stallman (who initially proposed "LiGNUx," but suggested "GNU/Linux" instead after hearing complaints about the awkwardness of the former term). GNU's June 1994 Bulletin described "Linux" as a "free Unix system for 386 machines" (with "many of the utilities and libraries" from GNU), but the January 1995 Bulletin switched to the term "GNU/Linux" instead.

Stallman's and the FSF's efforts to include "GNU" in the name started around 1994, but were reportedly mostly via private communications (such as the above-mentioned request to Debian) until 1996. In May 1996, Stallman released Emacs 19.31 with the Autoconf system target "linux" changed to "lignux" (shortly thereafter changed to "linux-gnu" in emacs 19.32), and included an essay "Linux and the GNU system" suggesting that people use the terms "Linux-based GNU system" (or "GNU/Linux system" or "Lignux" for short). He later used "GNU/Linux" exclusively, and the essay was superseded by Stallman's 1997 essay, "Linux and the GNU System".

Composition of operating systems

Modern free software and open-source software operating systems are composed of software by many different authors, including the Linux kernel developers, the GNU project, and other vendors such as those behind the X Window System. Desktop and server-based distributions use GNU software such as the GNU C Library (glibc), GNU Core Utilities (coreutils), GNU Compiler Collection, GNU Binutils, GNU gzip, GNU tar, GNU gettext, GNU grep, GNU awk, GNU sed, GNU Findutils, gnupg, libgcrypt, gnutls, GRUB, GNU readline, GNU ncurses, and the Bash shell.

In a 2002 analysis of the source code for Red Hat Linux 7.1, a typical Linux distribution, the total size of the packages from the GNU project was found to be much larger than the Linux kernel. Later, a 2011 analysis of the Ubuntu distribution's "Natty" release main repository found that 8% to 13% of it consisted of GNU components (the range depending on whether GNOME is considered part of GNU), while only 6% is taken by the Linux kernel (9% when including its direct dependencies). Determining exactly what constitutes the "operating system" per se is a matter of continuing debate.

On the other hand, some embedded systems, such as handheld devices and smartphones (like Google's Android), residential gateways (routers), and Voice over IP devices, are engineered with space efficiency in mind and use a Linux kernel with few or no components of GNU, due to perceived issues surrounding bloat, and impeded performance. A system running μClinux is likely to substitute uClibc for glibc, and BusyBox for coreutils. Google's Linux-based Android operating system does not use any GNU components or libraries, using Google's own BSD-based Bionic C library in place of glibc. The FSF agrees that "GNU/Linux" is not an appropriate name for these systems.

There are also systems that use a GNU userspace and/or C library on top of a non-Linux kernel, for example Debian GNU/Hurd (GNU userland on the GNU kernel) or Debian GNU/kFreeBSD (which uses the GNU coreutils and C library with the kernel from FreeBSD).

Opinions

This section relies excessively on references to primary sources. Please improve this section by adding secondary or tertiary sources.
Find sources: "GNU/Linux naming controversy" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (November 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

GNU/Linux

FSF artwork of the gnu (GNU mascot) and the penguin Tux (mascot of the Linux kernel) representing their viewpoint on "GNU/Linux". The GNU General Public License (GPL), which is used by the Linux kernel as well as by most GNU software, armors both characters.

The FSF justifies the name "GNU/Linux" primarily on the grounds that the GNU project was specifically developing a complete system, of which they argue that the Linux kernel filled one of the final gaps; the large number of GNU components and GNU source code used in such systems is a secondary argument:

So if you were going to pick a name for the system based on who wrote the programs in the system, the most appropriate single choice would be GNU. But we don't think that is the right way to consider the question. The GNU Project was not, is not, a project to develop specific software packages. Many people have made major contributions to the free software in the system, and they all deserve credit. But the reason it is an integrated system—and not just a collection of useful programs—is because the GNU Project set out to make it one. We made a list of the programs needed to make a complete free system, and we systematically wrote, or found people to write, everything on the list.

— Richard Stallman

Other arguments include that the name "GNU/Linux" recognizes the role that the free-software movement played in building modern free and open source software communities, that the GNU project played a larger role in developing packages and software for GNU/Linux or Linux distributions, and that using the word "Linux" to refer to the Linux kernel, the operating system and entire distributions of software leads to confusion on the differences about the three. Because of this confusion, legal threats and public relations campaigns apparently directed against the kernel, such as those launched by the SCO Group or the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (AdTI), have been misinterpreted by many commentators who assume that the whole operating system is being targeted. SCO and the AdTI have even been accused of deliberately exploiting this confusion.

Regarding suggestions that renaming efforts stem from egotism or personal pique, Stallman has responded that his interest is not in giving credit to himself but to the GNU Project: "Some people think that it's because I want my ego to be fed. Of course, I'm not asking you to call it 'Stallmanix'." In response to another common suggestion that many people have contributed to the system and that a short name cannot credit all of them, the FSF has argued that this cannot justify calling the system "Linux", since they believe that the GNU project's contribution was ultimately greater than that of the Linux kernel in these related systems.

In 2010, Stallman stated that naming is not simply a matter of giving equal mention to the GNU Project, saying that because the system is more widely referred as "Linux", people tend to "think it's all Linux, that it was all started by Mr. Torvalds in 1991, and they think it all comes from his vision of life, and that's the really bad problem."

Ariadne Conill, developer and security chair of Alpine Linux, has stated that in her opinion GNU/Linux is the correct name when referring to Linux distributions that are based on glibc and GNU coreutils, such as Debian and Fedora Linux. This can be contrasted to other Linux distributions which are based on bionic (Android) and musl (Alpine).

Linux

Proponents of naming the operating systems "Linux" state that "Linux" is used far more often than "GNU/Linux".

Eric S. Raymond writes (in the "Linux" entry of the Jargon File):

Some people object that the name "Linux" should be used to refer only to the kernel, not the entire operating system. This claim is a proxy for an underlying territorial dispute; people who insist on the term GNU/Linux want the FSF to get most of the credit for Linux because and friends wrote many of its user-level tools. Neither this theory nor the term GNU/Linux has gained more than minority acceptance.

When Linus Torvalds was asked in the documentary Revolution OS whether the name "GNU/Linux" was justified, he replied:

Well, I think it's justified, but it's justified if you actually make a GNU distribution of Linux ... the same way that I think that "Red Hat Linux" is fine, or "SUSE Linux" or "Debian Linux", because if you actually make your own distribution of Linux, you get to name the thing, but calling Linux in general "GNU Linux" I think is just ridiculous.

An earlier comment by Torvalds on the naming controversy was:

Umm, this discussion has gone on quite long enough, thank you very much. It doesn't really matter what people call Linux, as long as credit is given where credit is due (on both sides). Personally, I'll very much continue to call it "Linux", ...

The GNU people tried calling it GNU/Linux, and that's ok. It's certainly no worse a name than "Linux Pro" or "Red Hat Linux" or "Slackware Linux" ...

Lignux is just a punny name—I think Linux/GNU or GNU/Linux is a bit more "professional" ...

The name "GNU/Linux," particularly when using Stallman's preferred pronunciation, has been criticized for its perceived clumsiness and verbosity, a factor that Torvalds has cited as the downfall of operating systems such as 386BSD.

The Linux Journal speculated that Stallman's advocacy of the combined name stems from frustration that "Linus got the glory for what wanted to do."

Others have suggested that, regardless of the merits, Stallman's persistence in what sometimes seems a lost cause makes him and GNU look bad. For example, Larry McVoy (author of BitKeeper, once used to manage Linux kernel development) opined that "claiming credit only makes one look foolish and greedy".

Many users and vendors who prefer the name "Linux," such as Jim Gettys, one of the original developers of the X Window System, point to the inclusion of non-GNU, non-kernel tools, such as KDE, LibreOffice, and Firefox, in end-user operating systems based on the Linux kernel:

There are lots of people on this bus; I don't hear a clamor of support that GNU is more essential than many of the other components; can't take a wheel away, and end up with a functional vehicle, or an engine, or the seats. I recommend you be happy we have a bus.

See also

References

  1. ^ Noyes, Katherine (10 May 2012). "To GNU or Not to GNU? That Is the Question". www.linuxinsider.com. Archived from the original on 17 July 2019. Retrieved 13 January 2023.
  2. ^ Kurp, Abraham (July 2008). "Learning The Linux Lingo". MakeUseOf. Archived from the original on 8 March 2009. Retrieved 10 April 2011.
  3. ^ Siever, Ellen (June 2005). "What Is Linux". Linux Dev Center. O'Reilly. Archived from the original on 18 July 2006. Retrieved 10 April 2011.
  4. Eckert, Jason W. (2012). Linux+ Guide to Linux Certification (Third ed.). Boston, Massachusetts: Cengage Learning. p. 33. ISBN 978-1111541538. Archived from the original on May 9, 2013. Retrieved April 14, 2013. The shared commonality of the kernel is what defines a system's membership in the Linux family; the differing OSS applications that can interact with the common kernel are what differentiate Linux distributions.
  5. Wynants, Marleen; Cornelis, Jan (2005). How Open is the Future?: Economic, Social & Cultural Scenarios Inspired by Free & Open-source Software. Asp / Vubpress / Upa. p. 71. ISBN 9789054873785.
  6. ^ Stallman, Richard. "Linux and the GNU System". Gnu.org. Retrieved 22 June 2011.
  7. ^ Stallman, Richard. "GNU/Linux FAQ".
  8. "About Debian". Debian. Retrieved 22 February 2017.
  9. "Trisquel GNU/Linux". Retrieved 22 February 2017.
  10. "Parabola GNU/Linux-libre". Retrieved 22 February 2017.
  11. St.Amant, Kirk; Still, Brian (2007). Handbook of Research on Open Source Software: Technological, Economic, and Social Perspectives. Information Science Reference. ISBN 978-1591409991.
  12. "Q&A: Richard Stallman, founder of the GNU Project and the Free Software Foundation". iTnews. 17 November 2008. Retrieved 31 July 2021.
  13. Jamie Mazer (26 November 1992). "Re: ANNOUNCEMENT: Alpha release Linux/GNU/X ..." Newsgroup: comp.unix.misc. Retrieved 3 February 2008.
  14. Rodrigo Vanegas (18 May 1993). "The free software myth and the commercial myth". Newsgroup: comp.os.linux. Retrieved 3 February 2008.
  15. Stephen Benson (12 May 1994). "Linux/GNU in EE Times". Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc. Usenet: 178@scribendum.win-uk.net. Retrieved 31 January 2008.
  16. Official announcement of the name change on the debian-announce mailing list
  17. Moody, Glyn (2002). Rebel Code: Linux And The Open Source Revolution. Basic Books. ISBN 978-0738206707.
  18. Williams, Sam; Stallman, Richard M. (2010). Free as in Freedom 2.0 (PDF). GNU Press. p. 151. ISBN 978-0-9831592-1-6.
  19. "GNU's Bulletin, vol. 1 no. 17".
  20. "GNU's Bulletin, vol. 1 no. 18".
  21. Richard Stallman (12 January 2003). "Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?". linux-kernel (Mailing list). Lkml.org. Retrieved 22 June 2011.
  22. Matt Welsh (8 September 1994). "Linux is a GNU system and the DWARF support". Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc. Retrieved 3 February 2008. RMS's idea (which I have heard first-hand) is that Linux systems should be considered GNU systems with Linux as the kernel.
  23. Stallman, Richard. "emacs-19.31-19.32.diff-1". pp. line 151–155. Retrieved 21 March 2017.
  24. Stallman, Richard. "Linux and The GNU system". gnu.org. Retrieved 21 March 2017.
  25. David A. Wheeler (29 July 2002). "More Than a Gigabuck: Estimating GNU/Linux's Size". the total of the GNU project's code is much larger than the Linux kernel's size. Thus, by comparing the total contributed effort, it's certainly justifiable to call the entire system GNU/Linux and not just Linux.
  26. ^ Côrte-Real, Pedro (31 May 2011). "How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?". Split Perspective. (self-published data)
  27. Torvalds, Linus (9 January 2002). "Posting to the glibc mailing list". Retrieved 30 August 2021.
  28. ^ "GNU/Linux FAQ by Richard Stallman".
  29. Bradley M. Kuhn, Android/Linux's Future and Advancement of Mobile Software Freedom, blog post (4 November 2009).
  30. Paul, Ryan (23 February 2009). "Dream(sheep++): A developer's introduction to Google Android". Arstechnica.com. Retrieved 22 June 2011.
  31. Debian GNU/Hurd web page, and GNU Hurd web page. (Accessed June 2013.)
  32. Debian GNU/kFreeBSD web page (accessed June 2013).
  33. ^ "Richard Stallman, "Linux and the GNU Project"". GNU Project. Retrieved 22 June 2011.
  34. Mike Angelo (28 April 2003). "SCO-Caldera v IBM". Archived from the original on 14 September 2010. Retrieved 12 June 2004. Generally, SCO's Caldera v IBM Complaint is vague and confusing as to whether the accusations involve the Linux kernel, the GNU/Linux operating system, Linux distributions, Linux applications, or whatever.
  35. Eben Moglen (27 June 2003). "FSF Statement on SCO v IBM]". SCO has used "Linux" to mean "all free software", or "all free software constituting a UNIX-like operating system." This confusion, which the Free Software Foundation warned against in the past, is here shown to have the misleading consequences the Foundation has often predicted
  36. Lisa Stapleton (27 May 2004). "Stallman: Accusatory Report Deliberately Confuses". LinuxInsider. In particular, Stallman criticized the report for capitalizing on common confusion between the Linux kernel, which Stallman says "Linus really wrote", with the full GNU operating system and associated software, which can be and generally is used with the Linux kernel.
  37. "Transcript of Richard M. Stallman's speech, "Free Software: Freedom and Cooperation", given at New York University in New York, NY, on 29 May 2001".
  38. "Richard Stallman talk+Q&A at the useR! 2010 conference (audio files attached)". R-statistics blog. 26 July 2010.
  39. Conill, Ariadne (30 March 2022). "it is correct to refer to GNU/Linux as GNU/Linux".
  40. Moore, J.T.S. (Produced, Written, and Directed) (2001). Revolution OS (DVD).
  41. "Linus Torvalds, Linux, GNU/Linux". YouTube. 3 September 2009.
  42. Linus Torvalds (3 June 1996). "Lignux, what's the matter with you people?". Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc.
  43. Hoffman, Chris (4 March 2013). "The Great Debate: Is it Linux or GNU/Linux?". Retrieved 22 December 2016.
  44. "It's GNU/Linux; stop calling it "Linux" (idea)". 28 April 2001. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  45. Torvalds, Linus (16 March 1993). "Post". comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit. Google Groups. Retrieved 19 February 2011. No. That's it. The cool name, that is. We worked very hard on creating a name that would appeal to the majority of people, and it certainly paid off: thousands of people are using linux just to be able to say "OS/2? Hah. I've got Linux. What a cool name". 386BSD made the mistake of putting a lot of numbers and weird abbreviations into the name, and is scaring away a lot of people just because it sounds too technical.
  46. "From the Publisher: On the Politics of Freedom". Linux Journal No. 30 (October 1996). Archived from the original on 8 December 2004. Retrieved 12 June 2004. Perhaps RMS is frustrated because Linus got the glory for what RMS wanted to do.
  47. Larry McVoy (3 April 1999). "Re: GNU/Linux". linux-kernel (Mailing list). Archived from the original on 29 June 2012.
  48. Jim Gettys (5 April 1999). "Re: GNU/Linux". linux-kernel (Mailing list). Archived from the original on 6 August 2012.

External links

Linux
Linux kernel
Controversies
Distributions
Organizations
Adoption
Media
Professional related certifications
GNU Project
History
Licenses
Software
Contributors
Other topics
Categories: