Should You Say Gnu/Linux: No Probably Not

We've all heard the GNU/Linux meme but in all seriousness should you actually say GNU/Linux or is it just a big waste of time.

==========Support The Channel==========

=========Video Platforms==========

==========Social Media==========

==========Credits==========
🎨 Channel Art:
All my art has was created by Supercozman

#GNU #Linux

🎵 Ending music

DISCLOSURE: Wherever possible I use referral links, which means if you click one of the links in this video or description and make a purchase I may receive a small commission or other compensation.

[ChrisTitusTech]

I loved this video… I’m going to go around correcting the gnu/Linux crowd… actually it’s gnu/systemd /xorg/Linux

[notuxnobux]

gnu/linux made sense in the early days when gnu coreutils and gcc were the literal end-user software used by the user for _operating_ the _system_. These days it's not really important, except if you are running a server and using mostly gnu tools daily. At work we call our system busybox linux because we use busybox directly and it has actual practical differences with gnu so its important to be reminded of that.
For me personally I say gnu/linux when I mean the literal posix interface on systems running gnu or gnu coreutils and linux when I mean linux specific os parts (/proc and drivers for example).

[wojteksowinski]

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as GNU/Linux, is in fact, systemd/GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, systemd plus GNU/Linux. GNU/Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning systemd system made useful by the systemd corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the systemd system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of systemd which is widely used today is often called "GNU/Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the systemd system, developed by the systemd Project.

There really is a GNU/Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. GNU/Linux is normally used in combination with the systemd operating system: the whole system is basically systemd with GNU/Linux added, or systemd/GNU/Linux. All the so-called "GNU/Linux" distributions are really distributions of systemd/GNU/Linux.

[andljoy]

We all know its going to be called linuxd at some point :P

[Pikaloid]

If we want Linux to spread into the mainstream we need to simplify things, including the name. Linux looks great and isn't as scary as a name that extends like a folder path.

[rcht]

did you just draw a circle in GIMP???!

[AlexNaanou]

In the old days (end of the 90s) we used to call the category either UN*X or POSIX OS and a specific distribution by it's name, i.e. FreeBSD, Red Hat, LFS, Debian, Solaris, Darwin, ... etc. and this approach worked quite well in describing the general category.

Yes, you could slice things in a bit more granular way and talk about "families", like BSD, System V, Solaris/SCO/AIX, "GNU", ... etc, that made sense when talking of the general architecture.

Today people tend to mix things up quite allot, calling everything Linux (including the Berkley family and Mac's) or dropping the name completely and now it's a new OS, or even mixing up the desktop and the OS....

IMHO, specifying a family of operating systems is useful when talking about the user interface in the broad sense, i.e. the init system, be it sys-v init or systemd, the user env, ... here the broad categories would be BSD (and derivatives), GNU, and things like Busybox.... saying Linux at anything that uses a Linux kernel is not very informative as in this respect you should call Android a Linux, which it technically is but in its out-of-the-box state it resists the notion that a user can expect it to comply with POSIX (yes, you can dance around this and expose the underlaying mechanics but that's besides the point).... so, IMHO calling everything resembling POSIX a Linux is quite bad, the old approach was quite logical and effective but not many people use it now, explicitly saying GNU-slash-Linux with GNU being the default for most distros is not efficient but historically correct...

I'd suggest explicitly specifying GNU/Linux (or Linux as it's the most popular combo) or Busybox/Linux as categories, the distro name/family is good enough to be more specific and for differently structured stuff the "distro" is the category, this would include the commercial stuff like MacOS, Android, AIX, ... etc.

[The_Wandering_Nerd]

So if I install, say, GNU Emacs on Windows, would I have to call it GNU/Windows?

[christiansilvermoon]

Honestly, yes, this is what distro names are for: To encompass the exact tools/config that a system comes with. I don't typically unironically say "GNU/Linux" unless I'm attempting to pay homage to GNU for some specific reason or unless I'm comparing Linux with GNU to something like Android. It's long winded and, as you put it, not very helpful information most of the time.

[SigSeg-V]

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!

[toranshaw]

I just use Linux, when referring to the whole ecosystem, especially as saying GNU/Linux does makes things even more complicated for new users. If I'm talking about a specific distro, however, I just mention that OSs name.

[RealMephres]

I honestly am glad that you make such videos. You helped me to make the jump from Fedora to Endeavouros and become more of a minimalist when it comes to Linux, just keeping things simple. Thanks, Brodie.

[OcteractSG]

I’d say, where possible, use the name of the distro or name of the distro that the family of distros is based on (e.g., Debian for Linux Mint, MX Linux, Kali Linux, etc.; Arch for Manjaro, Arco, Artix, etc.; etc.).

[mrveink]

6:26 I mostly agree with this video, but just want to say that it sometimes is very important for debugging/troubleshooting to mention if it's not a GNU system. Many programs have issues compiling on LLVM+musl so if it's the cause you should mention that, cause people expect you to use GNU.

[danielberglv]

I always use the distro names, when referring to, what I run on a machine. If ever I need to specify it further, I use the term "Linux based", which also fits nicely into things like Android, ChromeOS etc. I would never just say "Linux", since it makes it sound like something specific, without actually saying anything at all.

[sneff]

Tho u cant discount the fact almost all the apps under gnu/linux compile under gcc. This is also another reason why alpine isnt commonly used as most apps mainly dont work under musl

[wChris_]

there is also toybox which is a busybox replacement and actually used in android

[SlideRSB]

Missed opportunity with your thumbnail. Since you went there with the text in the thumbnail, You really should have had Tux slapping Stallman.

[AndrewErwin]

Brodie, all I really want to know is when can we expect your version of Stallman's song? I just wan to hear you sing.

[Redmage]

Complete side question - would you be willing to take a look at mesa-amber and the status of those being left behind by mesa proper?