cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/5592397
Forty years ago, Richard Stallman announced the plan to develop the GNU operating system, which would be entirely composed of free software. The existence of a free operating system would enable people to operate their computers in freedom, throwing off the power of the developers of nonfree software. The GNU Project has also built the global free software movement.
Are we? I personally consider RMS a lunatic who’s salty that no one considers his set of tools an operating system. Don’t get me wrong, they did a lot of good, but every time they mention that GNU is an OS I cringe a little inside.
Well, a “set of tools” is not any more or less an operating system than a kernel by itself is, yet not only do Linux fans insist on their kernel being an OS, but that RMS’s “set of tools” is somehow part of “Linux the operating system.” If he’s “salty” about anything it’s probably his life’s work being attributed to someone else who doesn’t even share his philosophy, which I think is understandable.
If you want to be really pedantic, like me, you can note that the Linux-libre variant of Linux is an official GNU project, so you can say that there is an official GNU kernel.
Regardless, I would say the most important contribution of the GNU project is the GNU General Public License, moreso than any specific tool or “set of tools.”
I think youre mixing up importance with being everything, gnu is insanely important and has had a lot of positive effects - but that doesn’t make it my second wife any more than it makes it an OS. its a software foundation at the end of the day.
This even includes the linux-libre, its not all of gnu like all of gnu isn’t an os, one could extend the same idea to the KDE foundation too
Arguably neither GNU utils or the Linux kernel are OSs since they don’t operate anything on their own. They more accurately parts of system. I think distros are more accurately called OSs