Untitled

Jackson Powell
Jackson Powell

<We need to go back to the times when hardware was more fragmented but software wasn't.
yeah
be linux
have 1% market share
make 3 competing GUI toolkits (that look and work almost same), split developers into 3 projects to each reinvent the wheel instead of cooperating to make superior toolkit
make 100 different distros to cause confusion for users
just like if someone was doing diversion to weaken linux...

There should be one linux OS. And a few "distros", but distros would be just configuration setups. So for example you would have "server distro" and "desktop distro", the server distro would be just configured differently and had different bundled tools and software. Or a slow distro like Debian (that is LTS), and a (((modern))) distro that would put all new shits every week, or just use channels (stable / testing).

Linux and open source are broken at the basics. They rather fork everything for no reasons, than cooperate to make superior things. Also they don't give a shit what users want, they produce user-unfriendly command line shits that nobody will use except themselves.

All urls found in this thread:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html
https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/certificates/1190p.pdf
Caleb Fisher
Caleb Fisher

make 3 competing GUI toolkits (that look and work almost same), split developers into 3 projects to each reinvent the wheel instead of cooperating to make superior toolkit
make 100 different distros to cause confusion for users
just like if someone was doing diversion to weaken linux...
-t. poettering

Josiah Adams
Josiah Adams

Linux and open source are broken at the basics.
Linux
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring 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.
open source
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html
Also they don't give a shit what users want, they produce user-unfriendly command line shits that nobody will use except themselves.
You haven't learned using command line tools yet, have you? You absolute illiterate nigger, fuck off with your gui cancer. Go back to windows with your dirty mouse you terminal-phobic shill!

Jayden Green
Jayden Green

thanks Captain Obvious, you've saved the village

Jonathan Allen
Jonathan Allen

having 100 different distro is bad.
implying linux distro wasn't about choice rather than convenient.
Why you're defending niggers of OP? You're either a honorary nigger or a gay dick sucked nigger for making this shitty thread. Kill yourself.

Mason Perry
Mason Perry


having 100 different distro is bad.
implying linux distro wasn't about choice rather than convenient.
Why you're defending the niggers OP? You're either a honorary nigger or a gay dick sucked nigger for making this shitty thread. Kill yourself.

Jack Wood
Jack Wood

Linux is just a kernel m8.

Also all-those so-called different OS' are all just the same exact OS, the GNU OS, hence why they're all called "Distributions"

For Debian;

Distrobution = Debian
OS = GNU
Kernel = Linux

For Fedora

Distribution = Fedora
OS = GNU
Kernel = Linux

See where I'm going with this?
Now what if it's not a GNU based OS? Like Android version 8

Distribution = Oreo
OS = Android
Kernel = OS

Easy right?

Joseph Lewis
Joseph Lewis

Kernel = OS
Man I need sleep, I meant to say kernel = Linux and fuck it I don't want to delete the post and re-do it

Asher Parker
Asher Parker

I missed the early days of Linux (started with Slackware), but probably they just used Linux kernel with GNU tools, and whatever other open source programs they found. Eventually someone made somewhat popular distros like SLS, but before that there wasn't any standard or conformity and they just did whatever made sense and worked for them. So the "real" Linux is more like LFS.

Lincoln Adams
Lincoln Adams

There should be one linux OS.
No thanks.

Julian Moore
Julian Moore

Support for so many varieties of hardware is a strength, not a weakness. There is only one GNU/Linux. There could be a billion distros and they would all be GNU/Linux. Again, being able to fork is a strength not a weakness. You seem to have completely missed the point of open source software.

Hunter Morris
Hunter Morris

reported for spam

too many choices are bad
also because of so many competing distros, contributors need to be split between them. If instead they worked on one or two distros, the quality of them could be way better.

so why open source idiots develop only one kernel, but at same time 100 distros and 3 gui toolkits? why so much diversity at distros, but zero at kernel? why nobody stops them?
why they lose time on doing another stupid distro when they could develop GUI tools for all linuxes?

Again, being able to fork is a strength not a weakness.
that's a weakness when everybody just makes 15th fork, instead of all of them working on a single distro/software

You seem to have completely missed the point of open source software.
the point of open source is that open source cucks develop shit for free and then greedy jews steal that and make profit off it

Nathan Nelson
Nathan Nelson

There is but zero at kernel
False. There are many forks of the Linux kernel. Debian for example has their own.

Jeremiah Wright
Jeremiah Wright

that's a weakness when everybody just makes 15th fork, instead of all of them working on a single distro/software

There are many cancerous pieces of shit in the open source community. Nobody should be forced to work with people like that, and cream always rises to the top.

the point of open source is that open source cucks develop shit for free and then greedy jews steal that and make profit off it

Stealing open sourced software is encouraged, but you'll have a difficult time making money on something that's already free.

Cameron Howard
Cameron Howard

It's GNU/Linux, an operating system which respects the user's freedom to sell or give away modified versions. For the user, it's untethered, unrestricted. Hence the term "free".

Camden Smith
Camden Smith

the point of open source is that open source cucks develop shit for free and then greedy jews steal that and make profit off it
Unless the software uses GPL :^)
Also,
reddit spacing
hasn't read GNU's website yet
You don't belong here. Either go back or educate yourself/lurk moar before posting.

Landon Morales
Landon Morales

so why open source idiots develop only one kernel
There isn't just one kernel.
but at same time 100 distros and 3 gui toolkits?
Because kernel development ask for hardware knowledge.

Camden Harris
Camden Harris

Improvements in software can only happen by throwing away code and starting over, not by trying to "fix" fundamentally broken code. There's a name for this phenomenon, escalation of commitment. Projects that suck the most always get the most work because better projects don't need as much funding and improvements to be good.

Cameron Martinez
Cameron Martinez

As i see, you have no clue what means OSS development. It's not about hoarding developers and they will have fun and make great things together. They have (sometimes huge) ego and normally do their projects for themselves and release it for everyone. This tribalism happen in MS too, but their development isn't about making the best for users or even for the devs, so your verdict is much closer to the SaaS faggotry. Also Qt and Gnome isn't about reinvent the wheel and the LKML is just a good example for what you want (even at least grsec became quasi-opensource).
If you want to see this problem than visit *BSD world where every fork have its problem "reinventing the wheel" thanks to minimal cooperation.
I know you are a troll but whatever. Maybe someone take your crap seriously. Consider posting this on /g/ for some laugh.

Sebastian Watson
Sebastian Watson

Can you stop making multiple threads about pointless bullshit

Easton Clark
Easton Clark

*BSD are effectively separate OS's, they don't pretend to be distros with same kernel. And because even the kernel can be vastly different, this means OpenBSD is free to make whatever fundamental changes it wants and not affect other OS. So it can really go push ahead a lot in its own timeframe, whereas the security mitigations it enables would just break a ton of stuff for other OS (already they have to slow down some because it affects their own ports tree). Then you have DragonflyBSD that forked from FreeBSD and went in a completely new kernel direction. This wouldn't be possible at all otherwise. They would be wasting too much time just maintaining & syncing that branch for no gain, if it was even possible at all.
Even so they do share code sometimes. On my old OpenBSD laptop, I had wireless driver originally written by DragonflyBSD. And Linux probably uses some *BSD code sometimes (OpenSSH and LibreSSL for example, but there's probably a lot more).

Isaac Rivera
Isaac Rivera

make 100 different distros to cause confusion for users
To be fair, there are only a few (maybe 20 at most) "original" GNU/Linux distros. The rest are just reskins of existing distros, which behave exactly like the systems they are based off of "under the hood."

And software was always fragmented. There used to be dozens of subtly incompatible variants of UNIX (which eventually led to the POS that is POSIX,) but nowadays it is just GNU/Linux, BSD, and the rapidly fading into irrelevance Solaris. And before there was UNIX, every computer ran a completely different operating system: so you had Multics, ITS, Lisp Machines, TENEX, the IBM mainframe OSes, language-as-an-OS systems like Smalltalk, BASIC and DOS on PCs, VMS, etc. This was a good thing though, because each of these systems brought something new to the table. Nowadays everything is either Unix or Windows.

I agree with you in general though. The GNU Project and the Linux kernel developers should work more closely to ensure a fully integrated and functional base system, like how the BSDs do things. GNU/Linux's amateurism is one of the ugliest things about it, especially when we consider how popular it is. And even if I do not agree with their ideas, I appreciate that the freedesktop.org guys are trying to resolve the issue of fragmentation.

Robert Hall
Robert Hall

Nowadays everything is either Unix or Windows.
Linux is not Unix.
OSX is not Unix.

Blake Cooper
Blake Cooper

OSX is actually a certified UNIX. Linux is Unix-like.

Connor Morris
Connor Morris

Oh man.
https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/certificates/1190p.pdf
This is to certify that Apple Inc. has entered into a Trademark License Agreement...
That certification sounds phony, almost as if Apple purchased the certification.
Where does POSIX declare what the /Library directory should contain? Where is /usr in OSX without installing the OSX Dev Tools - and specifically choosing to install /usr?

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Disable AdBlock to view this page