• Wilzax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Eventually the proper name for the operating system will just be the full configuration.nix file, and we’ll all rename our backups to "FullLegalName"OS

        In this future, NixOS replaces all other distros as the defacto standard way to manage packages

        • lad@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          If only nix wasn’t such a pain to read, with all the conveniences it has like automatically looking up variables in all of the places available.

          I understand the thought, but it feels like a lot of things done to simplify writing the code makes it way harder to read, and nix’s design is decades old and it really shows

          Also, there are sometimes issues with nix on macos, but I’m inclined to blame it on Apple

          • bluewing@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            When the heat death of the universe arrives, the Sackcloth and Ashes that is Slack will be there to mark it’s passing.

            Not even Debian will survive, but Slack will go on. Tar Balls Yum!

    • briefbeschwerer@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

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

      Many computer users run a modified version of the systemd init 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 init system, developed by the Red Hat.

      There really is a GNU/Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the init system they use. GNU/Linux is the os: a collection of programs that can be run by the init system. The operating system is an essential part of an init system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete init system. GNU/Linux is normally used in combination with the systemd init system: the whole system is basically systwmd with GNU/Linux added, or systemd/GNU/Linux. All the so-called GNU/Linux distributions are really distributions of systemd/GNU/Linux!

    • ramble81@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I made the joke that we’ll have SystemD/Linux replacing GNU/Linux and the number of “well asckuallys…” that popped up was simultaneously humorous and saddening.

    • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      systemd

      and a giant “fuck you” to Lennart Poettering for that. Not for creating an init system option - but for lobbying it into major distributions, instead of letting the users decide what they prefer. May he forever stub his toes on furniture.

      • jbk@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s not just an init system. Look up what it does and why it exists, instead of blindly hating some software for some obsessive reason.

          • cum@lemmy.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            What are you talking about, it is just an init and service manager…

            The rest of systemd is an ecosystem that are optional packages you can install on top of it. They are not essential or required.

        • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m not blindly hating. I despise the asshole responsible for the choice being taken away from me for many major distros and I wish him the plague for his manipulative approach in getting there.

          • jbk@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            The choice of making way more things than just the job of an init system harder than it has to be, especially when both flavors have to work. Feel free to call generous people who work for the community “assholes”, but it’s you who’s that, if anyone

            • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              People who lobby with decision makers at major distributions for their software to be made the de-facto standard, instead of leaving it to the userbase, have a deeply anti-democratic mindset, and that makes them assholes.

      • cum@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s weird as fuck. Major distros use it because it’s the most functional. If the other ones were as good, they’d be used. There is no “lobbying” lol, it just makes the most technical sense and is significantly more than just an init system. I’d rather users have a system that “just works” instead, since arbitrary choices aren’t necessarily a good thing.

        • Shadywack@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Poettering is a douchebag, a Royal fucking asshole, who happened to code a usable, performant, well coded project hosting subprojects that does a better job for the users than all their predecessors.

          He’s the guy people love to hate, and he’s really damn good.

  • josefo@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    3 months ago

    wow, I could read and entire book of this. It’s a new genre of erotica I think. Very high quality

  • Cyrus Draegur@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    Hnng yeah thats right womansplain to me, whip out those big beautiful FACTS and correct me till I BLEED

    • Luccus@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I work in IT and sometimes I have to explain something to a user who is somewhat tech-illiterate. Even developers may have significant blind spots when it comes to their OS or networking, for example.

      So, if I notice it, I’ll change some terminology and I may explain instructions differently or use metaphors so every user understands what I’m saying.

      And most coworkers do the same thing.

      Here’s why I bring this up: For whatever reason, some colleagues give female coworkers the same treatment.

      And that’s weird.

      If someone is constantly treated like this, they should be allowed to rant about it on their blog. I’m fine with snark if it geht’s a point across.

  • nUbee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    It would seem that GNU/Linux or Linux (whatever the user-accessing operating system is called) is the only OS that must mention its kernel. No one calls Windows the NT operating system, nor does anyone call Mac OS the Darwin operating system. So why should Linux be the exception?

    When I think of GNU, I think of a project that had a very particular goal in mind: build an operating system that replaces Unix with entirely free software. The project got nearly all the way there, but before they got a usable kernel working, Torvalds licensed his kernel with the GPL. With the Linux kernel combined with GNU, we have an OS the GNU project set out to create. So why should Torvalds get all the credit? Without calling the OS GNU, most people don’t even know how or why it came to be.

    I could see a valid argument to just simply call the OS GNU. It was the name the original team gave the project to have a fully functional OS made with entirely free software. True, Torvalds didn’t write Linux for GNU, but neither did the X Window System. A Kernel is essential for operation though, so I can see why the name GNU/Linux was proposed.

    • bravesirrbn ☑️@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Maybe it just boils down to “Linux” simply sounding better when pronounced

      Just like e.g. most people just say “velcro” and not “hook-and-loop” as the company Velcro itself wants people to call it.

  • BetaDoggo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    What’s the deal with Alpine not using GNU? Is it a technical or ideological thing? Or is it another “because we can” type distro?

  • 7uWqKj@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Yeah nice but why are you people so obsessed with men explaining things to women or vice-versa?

  • Dharma Curious (he/him)@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Can someone explain to me why people get upset about it being referred to as gnu+Linux or gnu/Linux? I’m not the most techy person, so maybe I’m missing something obvious, but like, objectively, isn’t it just as much gnu code as Linux?

    Again, not super techy, so please explain it to me like I’m the average Facebook aunt.

    • mightyfoolish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      get upset about it being referred to as gnu+Linux or gnu/Linux

      I would say it’s the opposite. Certain people get angry if you do not refer to it as GNU/Linux. These people used to be technically correct.

      GNU tried to rewrite Unix from scratch under the GNU GPL license. They view their copy left license (a license where if you incorporate any code under their license, you must release the code of your project as well) as morally superior. Their kernel didn’t work out, but Linus Torvolds wrote another kernel for that GNU OS.

      Obviously, GNU wanted credit for the OS components that were not Linux. That’s where the copypasta about “What you are using is in fact GNU+Linux…” came from. GNU is the heart of the free software movement so they have their fans as well that of course would also make that claim.

      Of course, as the meme in the OP suggests, you can now have a Linux distro that either does not use code owned by GNU or uses very little of their code. I would argue Ubuntu, Arch, etc still are technically GNU+Linux as they use GNU’s C compiler, their C implementation, their userspace programs like Bash and grep, etc. However, Alpine uses alternatives to GNU software such as the musl C implementation.

      • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Certain people get angry if you do not refer to it as GNU/Linux.

        I’ve never seen this happen. I’ve heard a lot of people complaining about these people, though.

        It’s like veganism. I’ve never met a militant vegan, but I’ve heard tons of people complain about them.

        I think it’s an effective strategy to avoid taking about real issues.