File: switchlinux3.swf-(644 KB, 640x480, Loop)
[_] Anonymous 07/06/17(Thu)13:54:50 No.

  Why doesn't 4chan have linux? It's the villain of the internet after all.

Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anonymous 07/06/17(Thu)14:14:57 No.

  what the literal fuck do you mean why doesn't 4chan have linux?

>> [_] Anonymous 07/06/17(Thu)14:21:31 No.

  >>3259972
  *run on
  aren't you pedantic

>> [_] Anonymous 07/06/17(Thu)17:19:14 No.

  *GNU/linux

  Also
  >Beowulf cluster
  o i am laffin

>> [_] Anonymous 07/06/17(Thu)17:20:27 No.

  >A flash animation bragging about using free software

>> [_] Anonymous 07/06/17(Thu)23:48:28 No.

  >>3260011
  It's better than the competition of non-free software.

>> [_] Anonymous 07/07/17(Fri)00:20:09 No.

  >>3259961
  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.

>> [_] Anonymous 07/07/17(Fri)01:03:20 No.

  >>3260084
  No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to
  Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products.
  GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation
  countless kudos and much appreciation.

  Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ.

  One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on
  this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it
  GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I
  named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The
  proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To
  do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you?

  (An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an
  operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a
  computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually
  distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a
  desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user
  needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest
  argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF).
  Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware.
  At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in
  various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as
  an obvious example.

>> [_] Anonymous 07/07/17(Fri)01:04:22 No.

  >>3260084
  Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into
  another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation
  than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called
  XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to
  draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this
  one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it.

  You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux
  distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you
  that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles
  spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing
  XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even
  if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that
  bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't
  perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in
  supporting any argument.

  Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves
  over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm
  feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very
  useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you
  and everyone refer to GCC as 'the Linux compiler'? Or at least, 'Linux GCC'? Seriously, where
  would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD?

>> [_] Anonymous 07/07/17(Fri)01:11:36 No.

  >>3260084
  If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this:

  Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue
  to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge
  contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have
  reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world.
  Now, go forth and don't be a nag.

  Thanks for listening.