I prefer to reward the household name to whatever seems appropriate at the time. Rather, it seems important to ask, “What have you done for me lately?”

(ie.. Ubuntu.. which is basically what I refer to, when I am talking about the operating system of choice..) If I were still using Fedora, I’d probably just go back to calling it Linux.

It’s about marketing .. GNU is about .. well I don’t know, but it’s not about that.

FreeDOS is similar. You don’t just get a kernel and a command-line interpreter. There are various tools included with both MS-DOS and FreeDOS that are needed to do day-to-day work with the OS. FreeDOS is a complete replacement for MS-DOS, and GNU is a complete replacement for UNIX, with Linux added to provide low-level management of the computer’s resources.

On the net, you can find various unauthorized versions of Microsoft Windows with extra programs either added in or taken out. They also have names, just like Ubuntu does, like “Windows XP Black” or “Tiny XP”.

You have to be very careful where you draw the line between what a complete operating system is, and what are added third-party applications.
People need to know and value why GNU/Linux exists. It’s here to be useful, and it’s here to restore freedom to people who are enslaved by the evils of proprietary software.

“Without ___________, there would be no Linux”

Insert GNU, Gnome, KDE, or any of the other very large, high profile projects and the sentence works (And may be even more correct). GNU is important, but not enough to force this horrible “GNU/Linux” name, that no one will use, on the world.

One such confusion is that people believe that the GNU software are nothing more than a bunch of userland tools. This is not accurate as GNU is an almost complete operating system. By 1991, the system was mostly complete as it was missing one critical component – the kernel program. With this in mind, it doesn’t take much effort to understand why people pair Linux (an operating system kernel program) together with GNU (an operating system without a kernel). Confusion about the reality can be minimized by persisting in the distinctions.

We are well aware of all the other important software that may be distributed together with a GNU+Linux system. Examples may include KDE, X.org, or BSD system software. Whatever extra software is included, the fact remains that all these other software run above the fundamental GNU plus Linux operating system.

The fact is without GNU you have no useful linux on this scale and without linux GNU would be very obscure indeed. They are a partnership and without any of the other programs you mention they work just fine together. I recognize it as GNU+Linux, GNU/Linux or when I’m lazy just linux.

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.

GNU libc may indeed be integral to the current implementation. But Andrew, how much of your libc would run without a kernel? Absolutely none of it. Therefore, Linux is Linux with GNU piled on top. You could of course compile it for another kernel. But wait, there isn’t a usable GNU kernel, is there?

GNU software is not the most low-level nor the most high-level portion of code in the Linux operating system. It’s bloody middle-ware. It’s no more important than anything else in the system. And the cog that turns it all, the piece that sets the standard for communication with the rest of the system is Linux. You compile against the kernel and *link* libraries in order to make use of them.

If I wanted “freedom” I’d turn the computer off and go fishing. I turn my computer on to get shit done, be it work or play. Having the convenience of your software at the price of your philosophical evangelism and ego is not worth it. I am not made *free* by using your software, I am chained to it by the manacles of your academic oppression and fanaticism. So just sod off and go build your toy kernel.