GNU/Linux naming controversy: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 00:31, 30 January 2008 editStevenj (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users14,833 edits →Opinions supporting "GNU/Linux": shortening/consolidating a few of the less central quotes a bit; I think we can all agree on this at least?← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 14:12, 16 November 2024 edit undoAnomieBOT (talk \| contribs)Bots6,574,404 editsm Dating maintenance tags: {{Primary sources}}
(816 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Short description\|Issues of what to call a system with the GNU toolchain and the Linux kernel}}
	{{quotefarm}}
			{{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>
	The '''GNU/Linux naming controversy''' is a dispute among members of the ] relating to the normative branding of the computer ]s commonly referred to as ].

			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>
	''GNU/Linux'' is the term promoted by the ] (FSF), its founder ], and its supporters, for operating systems that include ] software and the ].<ref></ref> The FSF argues for the term ''GNU/Linux'' because GNU was a longstanding project to develop a free operating system, of which the kernel was the last missing piece.<ref></ref> Proponents of the ''Linux'' term dispute this term for a number of reasons.

			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 ].
	Among the "top ten distributions" based on the Linux kernel and GNU software (September 2007)<ref> on DistroWatch.com</ref>, two (] and ]) use the term GNU/Linux in its official name, three (], ], ]) do not use either Linux or GNU/Linux in their names, four (], ], ], and ]) use Linux in their names, and finally ] uses a derivative name.

	{{Linux \| logo=]}}
	== History ==		== History ==
			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" />
	Plans for the ] were made in 1983 and in September of that year they were announced publicly. Software development work began in January 1984. GNU was to be a complete ] operating system composed entirely of ]. 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 (], device drivers, system-level utilities and daemons) was still mostly lacking. The GNU kernel, ], was still in its infancy. The Hurd followed an ambitious design which proved unexpectedly difficult to implement and has only been marginally usable.

			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>
	In 1991, the first version of the Linux kernel was released by ]. Early Linux kernel developers ] GNU code, including the ], to run on Linux. Later, when the GNU developers learned of Linux, they adapted other parts of GNU to run on the Linux kernel. This work filled the remaining gaps in running a completely free operating system.
			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>
	In 1992, the ] distribution adopted the name "Linux/GNU/X". The name "GNU/Linux" was first used by Debian in 1994. In GNU's June 1994 ''Bulletin'', Linux is referred to as a "free ] clone (with many GNU utilities and libraries)".<ref>{{cite web
	\|url=http://www.gnu.org/bulletins/bull17.html
	\|title=GNU's Bulletin, vol. 1 no. 17
	\|}}</ref> In the January 1995 edition, the term "GNU/Linux" was used instead.<ref>{{cite web
	\|url=http://www.gnu.org/bulletins/bull18.html
	\|title=GNU's Bulletin, vol. 1 no. 18
	\|}}</ref> In May 1996, 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.

			== Composition of operating systems ==
	== GNU code in Unix-like Linux-based systems==
			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.

	~~A Unix-like, Linux-based operating system has many components, including the Linux kernel, software developed by the GNU project, and substantial amounts of software such~~ as ~~the ] by other authors. In an~~ analysis of the source code for ~~packages comprising~~ ] 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=~~2002-07-~~29 \|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> Determining exactly what constitutes the "operating system" ''per se'' is a matter of continuing debate.		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" />

			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>
	In some ] such as ]s, the Linux kernel is used with few or no components of GNU, with alternatives like ] and ] replacing the GNU tools. Everyone, including the FSF, agrees that "GNU/Linux" is not an appropriate name for these systems.<ref name="fsf-faq"/> Almost all Linux-based desktops and servers do use the GNU components, such as ] (the GNU C Library), ], and ].

			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>
	== Opinions supporting "GNU/Linux"==
	] artwork of the ] (GNU mascot) and the ] ] (Linux kernel mascot) 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.]]

			== Opinions ==
	FSF claims the name "GNU/Linux" is justified because of the large number of GNU components and GNU ] used in such systems and because the GNU project specifically worked on what would bring about a complete operating system:

			{{Primary sources\|section\|date=November 2024}}
	{{quotation\|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.<ref name="linux-and-gnu">Richard Stallman, ""</ref>}}

			=== GNU/Linux ===
	As well as being justified on those technical grounds, FSF argues that the name issue is important as a way connecting the technical contribution of the GNU project and the ] (rather than that of the Linux kernel developers):
			] 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:
	{{quotation\|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.<ref name="fsf-faq">, the Free Software Foundation's responses to common objections to the "GNU/Linux" name.</ref>}}

			{{ quote
	{{quotation\|Calling this variant of the GNU system "Linux" plays into the hands of people who choose their software based only on technical advantage, not caring whether it respects their freedom.<ref>Richard Stallman, (2002).</ref>}}
			\| 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 — the specific subsystem that directly interfaces with the hardware — 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 1991 release notes for versions 0.01 to 0.11 of the Linux kernel (which was not released under the ] until version 0.12<ref>Linus Torvalds, "" (January 1992).</ref>), Torvalds wrote, "Sadly, a kernel by itself gets you nowhere <nowiki></nowiki> Most of the tools used with linux are GNU software."<ref>Linus Torvalds, "" (September 1991).</ref> Torvalds also wrote during the 1992 ] that, "As has been noted (not only by me), the linux kernel is a miniscule part of a complete system".<ref>Linus Torvalds, (Jan. 31, 1992).</ref>

			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" />
	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 ] are a key part of almost every 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;{{Fact\|date=June 2007}} 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 ] operating systems such as ], where many things besides the kernel change simultaneously.

			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>
	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.<ref>{{cite web
	\|title=SCO-Caldera v IBM
	\|url=http://www.mozillaquest.com/Linux03/ScoSource-10_Story01.html
	\|author=Mike Angelo
	\|date=] ]
	\|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.
	}}</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=]
	\|date=] 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
	\|publication=LinuxInsider
	\|url=http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/34069.html
	\|title=Stallman: Accusatory Report Deliberately Confuses
	\|date=] ]
	}}</ref>

			], 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>
	In response to suggestions that Stallman's 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">Richard Stallman, "", transcript of speech at New York University in New York, New York (] ]).</ref>

			=== Linux ===
	Stallman has admitted to irritation, although he believes it to be justified in response to seeing "an idealistic project stymied and made ineffective, because people don't usually give it the credit for what it has done," concluding "If you're an idealist like me, that can ruin your whole decade."<ref>Richard Stallman, "", linux-kernel mailing list (] ]).</ref>
			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 ]):
	In response to another common argument (see below), the FSF acknowledges that many people have contributed to GNU/Linux and that a short name cannot credit all of them, but argues that this cannot justify calling the system "Linux":

			{{ quote
	{{quotation\|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 ... 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).<ref name="fsf-faq"/>}}
			\|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:
	== Opinions supporting "Linux"==

			{{ quote
	"Linux" is by far the most widespread name,<ref>http://www.google.com/trends?q=GNU%2FLinux%2C+Linux</ref> 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 1990s, some time after the "Linux" name had already become popular. "Linux" is shorter and easier to say than "GNU/Linux", particularly given Stallman's suggested pronunciation of {{IPAEng\|gəˈnuː slæʃ ˈlɪnəks}} or {{IPAEng\|gəˈnuː plʌs ˈlɪnəks}}.
			\|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.<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>}}

	] writes (in the "Linux" entry of the ]):

	{{quotation\|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.}}

	Linus Torvalds has said in the documentary ], when asked if the name GNU/Linux was justified:

	{{quotation\|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.<ref>{{cite video\|people=Moore, J.T.S. (Produced, Written, and Directed)\|title=]\|medium=DVD\|date=2001}}</ref>}}

	An earlier comment by Torvalds on the naming controversy was:		An earlier comment by Torvalds on the naming controversy was:

			{{ quote
	{{quotation\|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".<ref>Linus Torvalds, "", comp.os.linux.misc newsgroup (] ]).</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", ...

			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
	In a similar vein, the debate over the name for the operating system is sometimes characterized as a trivial distraction; e.g. ] wrote "the Linux community spends too much of its energy on things such as nomenclature (like the name GNU/Linux versus Linux)."<ref>John C. Dvorak, "", ''PC Magazine'' (] ]).</ref>
			"Slackware Linux" ...

			Lignux is just a punny name—I think Linux/GNU or GNU/Linux is a bit more "professional" ...<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>
	The ''Linux Journal'' speculated that Stallman's advocacy of the combined name stems from frustration that "Linus got the glory for what <nowiki></nowiki> 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=] #30 (October 1996)
	\|quote=Perhaps RMS is frustrated because Linus got the glory for what RMS wanted to do
	\|}}</ref>

			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>
	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 the proprietary software ], once used to manage Linux kernel development, until the gratis license was revoked in the ]) opined that "claiming credit only makes one look foolish and greedy".<ref>Larry McVoy, "", linux-kernel mailing list (] ]).</ref>

			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>
	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. As stated by ], originator of X:

	~~{{quotation\|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>~~Jim~~ ~~Gettys,~~ , linux-kernel ~~mailing list (]~~ ]).</ref>}}		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>

			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:
	==Pronunciation==

			{{ quote
	Although "GNU/Linux" is often {{pronEng\|gəˈnuː ˈlɪnəks}}, "GNU Linux", Stallman has advocated explicit pronunciation of the slash to prevent the confusing implication that the Linux kernel itself is a GNU project:
			\| 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>

			}}
	{{quotation\|I prefer to pronounce it GNU-slash-Linux, or GNU-plus-Linux. The reason is 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.<ref>Jeremy Andrews, , ''KernelTrap.org'' (]. 2005).</ref>}}

	Given that Stallman pronounces ''GNU'' as {{IPA\|/gəˈnuː/}},<ref name="stallman-transcript"/> this would make it {{IPA\|/gəˈnuː ˈslæʃ ˈlɪnəks/}} or {{IPA\|/gəˈnuː ˈplʌs ˈlɪnəks/}}.

	== See also ==		== See also ==
	{{~~portal~~\|Free ~~software\|Free~~ ~~Software~~ ~~Portal Logo.svg~~}}		{{Portal\|Free and open-source software}}

	* ]		* ]
	* ]		* ]
	* ]		* ]
	* ] and ] (the general concept of using the name of a part as the name for the whole)
	* ]		* ]

	==References==		== References ==
	{{~~reflist~~\|2}}		{{Reflist\|30em}}

	== ~~Further~~ ~~reading~~ ==		== External links ==
	*		* (or "What's in a name?"), by Richard Stallman
	*		* , also by Richard Stallman
			*
	* (Craig Burley, ] ''gnu.misc.discuss'', ] ])
			* , by Richard Stallman, 2013
	* ('']'', ] ]). (''Slashdot'', ] ]).
	*
	*		*
	*
	* , Zagreb, 2006		* , Zagreb, 2006
	* ~~(Richard~~ ~~Stallman~~, ''ZDNet'', ] ])		* , 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
	* (''PCLinuxOnline'', ] ])
	* (Timothy R. Butler, ''Open for Business'', ] ])
	* (Josh Mehlman, ''ZDNet Australia'', ] ])

			{{Linux}}
	<!-- Interlang -->
			{{GNU}}

			{{DEFAULTSORT:GNU Linux naming controversy}}
	<!-- Categories -->
			]
	]		]
			]
	]		]
	]		]
			]

	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]

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 Kernel

Official 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

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.

References

^ 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.
^ Kurp, Abraham (July 2008). "Learning The Linux Lingo". MakeUseOf. Archived from the original on 8 March 2009. Retrieved 10 April 2011.
^ Siever, Ellen (June 2005). "What Is Linux". Linux Dev Center. O'Reilly. Archived from the original on 18 July 2006. Retrieved 10 April 2011.
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.
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.
^ Stallman, Richard. "Linux and the GNU System". Gnu.org. Retrieved 22 June 2011.
^ Stallman, Richard. "GNU/Linux FAQ".
"About Debian". Debian. Retrieved 22 February 2017.
"Trisquel GNU/Linux". Retrieved 22 February 2017.
"Parabola GNU/Linux-libre". Retrieved 22 February 2017.
St.Amant, Kirk; Still, Brian (2007). Handbook of Research on Open Source Software: Technological, Economic, and Social Perspectives. Information Science Reference. ISBN 978-1591409991.
"Q&A: Richard Stallman, founder of the GNU Project and the Free Software Foundation". iTnews. 17 November 2008. Retrieved 31 July 2021.
Jamie Mazer (26 November 1992). "Re: ANNOUNCEMENT: Alpha release Linux/GNU/X ..." Newsgroup: comp.unix.misc. Retrieved 3 February 2008.
Rodrigo Vanegas (18 May 1993). "The free software myth and the commercial myth". Newsgroup: comp.os.linux. Retrieved 3 February 2008.
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.
Official announcement of the name change on the debian-announce mailing list
Moody, Glyn (2002). Rebel Code: Linux And The Open Source Revolution. Basic Books. ISBN 978-0738206707.
Williams, Sam; Stallman, Richard M. (2010). Free as in Freedom 2.0 (PDF). GNU Press. p. 151. ISBN 978-0-9831592-1-6.
"GNU's Bulletin, vol. 1 no. 17".
"GNU's Bulletin, vol. 1 no. 18".
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.
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.
Stallman, Richard. "emacs-19.31-19.32.diff-1". pp. line 151–155. Retrieved 21 March 2017.
Stallman, Richard. "Linux and The GNU system". gnu.org. Retrieved 21 March 2017.
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.
^ Côrte-Real, Pedro (31 May 2011). "How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?". Split Perspective. (self-published data)
Torvalds, Linus (9 January 2002). "Posting to the glibc mailing list". Retrieved 30 August 2021.
^ "GNU/Linux FAQ by Richard Stallman".
Bradley M. Kuhn, Android/Linux's Future and Advancement of Mobile Software Freedom, blog post (4 November 2009).
Paul, Ryan (23 February 2009). "Dream(sheep++): A developer's introduction to Google Android". Arstechnica.com. Retrieved 22 June 2011.
Debian GNU/Hurd web page, and GNU Hurd web page. (Accessed June 2013.)
Debian GNU/kFreeBSD web page (accessed June 2013).
^ "Richard Stallman, "Linux and the GNU Project"". GNU Project. Retrieved 22 June 2011.
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.
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
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.
"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".
"Richard Stallman talk+Q&A at the useR! 2010 conference (audio files attached)". R-statistics blog. 26 July 2010.
Conill, Ariadne (30 March 2022). "it is correct to refer to GNU/Linux as GNU/Linux".
Moore, J.T.S. (Produced, Written, and Directed) (2001). Revolution OS (DVD).
"Linus Torvalds, Linux, GNU/Linux". YouTube. 3 September 2009.
Linus Torvalds (3 June 1996). "Lignux, what's the matter with you people?". Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc.
Hoffman, Chris (4 March 2013). "The Great Debate: Is it Linux or GNU/Linux?". Retrieved 22 December 2016.
"It's GNU/Linux; stop calling it "Linux" (idea)". 28 April 2001. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
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.
"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.
Larry McVoy (3 April 1999). "Re: GNU/Linux". linux-kernel (Mailing list). Archived from the original on 29 June 2012.
Jim Gettys (5 April 1999). "Re: GNU/Linux". linux-kernel (Mailing list). Archived from the original on 6 August 2012.

External links

"Why GNU/Linux?" (or "What's in a name?"), by Richard Stallman
GNU Users Who Have Never Heard of GNU, also by Richard Stallman
GNU/Linux FAQ by Richard Stallman
The "Say Lignux" Campaign, by Richard Stallman, 2013
David A. Wheeler on why he mostly says "GNU/Linux"
Stallman explaining the relationship of GNU and Linux, Zagreb, 2006
Who wrote Linux?, by Josh Mehlman, ZDNet Australia, 7 July 2004
"What is GNU/Linux" Archived 18 November 2016 at the Wayback Machine, Debian Project

v t e Linux
Linux kernel	History Linus's law Linux-libre Booting process Kernel oops Tux more…
Controversies	Criticism of Linux Criticism of desktop Linux GNU/Linux naming controversy Tanenbaum–Torvalds debate SCO and Linux
Distributions	General comparison Distributions list Netbook-specific comparison Distributions that run from RAM Lightweight Security-focused operating system Package manager Package format List of software package managers
Organizations	LinuxChix Linux Counter Linux Documentation Project Linux Foundation Linux Mark Institute Linux User Group (LUG)
Adoption	Adopters Desktop Embedded Gaming Mobile Range of use Linux malware
Media	DistroWatch Free Software Magazine Full Circle Hacker Public Radio Linux.com Linux Format Linux Gazette Linux Journal Linux Magazine LinuxUser Ubuntu User Linux Outlaws Linux Voice LugRadio LWN.net Phoronix Revolution OS The Code
Professional related certifications	CompTIA Linux+ Linux Foundation Red Hat Ubuntu
Linux portal Free and open-source software portal Category

v t e GNU Project
History	GNU Manifesto Free Software Foundation Europe India Latin America History of free software
Licenses	GNU General Public License linking exception font exception GNU Lesser General Public License GNU Affero General Public License GNU Free Documentation License GNAT Modified General Public License
Software	GNU (variants) Hurd Linux-libre glibc Bash coreutils findutils Build system GCC binutils GDB GRUB GNUstep GIMP Jami GNU Emacs GNU TeXmacs GNU Octave GNU Taler GNU R GSL GMP GNU Electric GNU Archimedes GNUnet GNU Privacy Guard Gnuzilla (IceCat) GNU Health GNUmed GNU LilyPond GNU Go GNU Chess Gnash Guix more...
Contributors	Benjamin Mako Hill Bradley M. Kuhn Brian Fox Federico Heinz Georg C. F. Greve John Sullivan Nagarjuna G. Richard M. Stallman
Other topics	GNU/Linux naming controversy Revolution OS Free Software Foundation anti-Windows campaigns Defective by Design

Categories: