this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2023
98 points (95.4% liked)

Linux

48130 readers
554 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I just found about this distro, which is relatively new (2021). Its specificity is that it doesn't features any GNU software by default, which I find interesting.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Raphael@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Sure, go ahead, use licenses that let Apple steal everything later.

[–] Aatube@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago

Not using GNU software doesn't mean you don't use any copyleft licenses or GPL.

[–] troyunrau@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It is good to have a diversity of software. That doesn't make it stupid. Most of the alternatives to GNU programs are GPL licensed anyway.

[–] mrh@mander.xyz 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is patently false. Most alternatives to GNU software are permissively licensed (MIT, BSD, Apache, etc.). Just look at musl, clang, bzip2, and the various “new” userland replacements like ripgrep, neovim, bat, exa, dust, etc. The one notable exception is busybox which is GPL 2.

I don’t know why this trend exists, but I am constantly disappointed that talented young open source devs choose to sacrifice software freedom just because it will make their software easier to integrate in proprietary contexts. This strikes me as pure vanity or greed on the devs part so that their software is more popular and maybe even monetizable.

I hope that trend halts, but time will tell.

[–] wgs@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago

Arguing over licences to judge how much a piece of software is worth is sterile IMO.

If you personally cannot use software that's not GPL'd, then it's fine. But there's no need to sound condescending like this, it brings absolutely nothing to the table. This could only result in a flame war (and it already is unfortunately, seeing the comments below), which is kind of sad.

So yeah, no prob mate, this is not for you, we get it. See you on the next thread 🫡