Linux

7349 readers

225 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system

Also check out:

Original icon base courtesy of [email protected] and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Ategon

anzo

dwraf_of_ignorance

-11

Should we use *Linux when referring to the entire system, instead of Linux? (lemmy.ca)

submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by [email protected] to c/linux

17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I've been thinking about the best way to refer to systems that use the Linux kernel, whilst avoiding the confusions that come with using the latter for both meanings. Since there are GNU and non-GNU (e.g, Alpine Linux) systems, I assume that *Linux would cover both. However, for users without a technical background, the asterisk means much less than it does to developers — this seems self-deprecating, considering that the point of the suggested term is to avoid confusion for NON-TECHNICAL users. Am I overthinking?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Good point. I've just gotten used to the fact that gnu-everything is required to compile gnu-anything, both gnuseful and gnuseless, but you eventually realize that you have the wrong version of gnu-something. So I stopped caring after dicking around with dependency resolutionfor far too long to make it work. Gnu is like furniture (Gnurniture) to me - it's just there, and the less I have to think about it living in my gnuserspace, the better.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

Gnupvoted