But I’d like to remember that there are more than a handful of Linux distributions we use everyday while forgetting they don’t use GNU Software at all.

I get reminded of that every time the conversation comes sup, it’s systematic, even when I preemptively mention it. I couldn’t forget it even if I wanted to. I then remind people that GNU free of Linux virus(/s) also exists.

https://old.reddit.com/r/linuxmasterrace/comments/dbfxn7/replying_to_a_comment_reading_linux_is_a_kernel/f227k04/

https://old.reddit.com/r/linuxmasterrace/comments/o058hi/not_gnu/h1tpf29/

Debian did it before, Debian/kfreeBSD, Glorious GNU free of that Linux virus.

And by the way that’s also why GNU makes more sens imo, because when people talk about “Linux”, saying something like “try Linux!”, they obviously don’t mean Android, everybody already runs Android, they don’t mean any system running the linux kernel, like chromeos, or embedded system inside a microwave, because everybody already uses the linux kernel. Really what they mean is “try libre systems that our GNU based distros are”. Because if it’s not about freedom, then it’s about running a specific component, a specific kernel, and then our glorious free distros have nothing to claim to be superior to chromeos for instance(ignoring potential technical limitations for the sake of the argument, chromeos is just to be understood here as any proprietary system using the linux kernel). Disarmed of its ideological roots libre software becomes inoffensive for giant corps like google seeking control over their users, because they simply use the freedom to their advantage without giving it to their users. And that’s when I always repeat :

Words control ideas, ideas control people (Heard from Michael Parenti)

---

Damn, I want GNU Hurd to be s table soon so I could flex about my GNU system.

Not going to happen unfortunately, it’s basically stopped, I think I’ve read somewhere that the last commit to hurd’s code was something like 3 years ago … The FSF and GNU project don’t consider it worth investing in when Linux-libre does the job.

That won’t stop me from flexing about my GNU system personally, and by that I mean, currently Fedora, but it could be any other distros(of course not including those that don’t actually use GNU stuff like Android and Alpine). Everybody and his dog runs Linux, really what I run is GNU OS, it just happens to sport that Linux kernel because it’s the best GPLed kernel out there for the moment … You know, that’s the idea am pushing out there, that’s routine speech sort of.

lemme copy paste here in spoiler a copypasta of my own I used a few times and had quite some success :

spoiler

Calling it by the name of the original project or by the name of the kernel has implications.

Linux, the kernel, as the name of the whole system, is a pro corporate term that says our system is defined by running a particular kernel and it was started in 1991 by a CS student for fun.

GNU, the original name of the project to create a full libre system for PC, that is, a system assembled from numerous libre software that respect’s the user’s freedom by giving him absolute control over his hardware, say that our system was started in 1984 by people who thought you, I and everybody else deserved to be able to use their computers on their own terms rather having to comply with the conditions of something like microsoft.

Also by calling it Linux you refer to all system running the Linux kernel. Is that what we are about? I don’t know about you but stuff like android and chromeos, that does not interest me.

By calling it GNU you refer to all libre systems in general. So our distros, and stuff like debian/kfreeBSD and the BSD distros -just like what people mean when they say “install linux” in general for instance-, unless you specifically want to exclude those distros then GNU/Linux makes sens.

A kernel really isn’t a good way to define our libre system. It’s assembled from numerous libre software projects to make a full system that respect our freedom, that’s what defines our system, GNU.

Businesses only use the terms “linux” and “open source”, so they have much more exposition, but there’s no point in using those terms unless you have the same agenda as businesses like microsoft who says it loves “linux” and “open source”. Libre software and GNU are the original, freedom referring, on point, and shorter terms.

An example on the top of my mind is people saying “linux all the things!”, they really mean “free everything!”.

Open source also introduces a confusion with people thinking it’s all about being able to read the source code. The open source definition is clear on that, modifications and sharing the modified versions must be allowed. It’s pretty much the same things as the 4 freedoms of the Libre software definition, it really is just a corporate friendly rebranding of Libre software.

If a kernel is what defines our system, does windows becomes one of our beloved distros if microsoft decide to make Linux their kernel with all the rest basically the same? That kinda is what chromeos is with google instead of microsoft, which isn’t far from macos, and that’s surely not what we are about here.

Words control ideas, ideas control people.

Perhaps we could create a c/GNU community?

Yeah maybe, although I guess it will probably be abandoned while everything will be here on c/linux unfortunately.

imo c/linux should rather be called c/GNU/Linux or c/GNU+Linux in the first place, or even better, c/GNU :) And c/Linux would be the lesser one dedicated to kernel-enthusiast :D (I have my own share of fun with this theme I gotta admit, being tongue in cheek a lot, but I really mean it)