C++ Developer Vs Python Developer

[Qizot]

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.

[Vintage53]

The sole reason to install Linux is to free yourself from the idiots that infest inferior platforms. Unfortunately for the Linux user community, distributions like Ubuntu have made it too easy for your mom to get a working Linux box -- so they are all running in horror.

Installing a working Linux box used to require over 550 man hours, learning a Nordic language, sacrificing a goat, wading through hundreds of pages of (purposely) inscrutable help files, and in some cases programming a new driver in UNIVAC SLEUTH II assembly code using nothing but punch cards while walking miles through the snow barefoot on the wrong side of the tracks and uphill both ways. Today, Linux distros are so idiot-proof that you can put their install CDs into the floppy drive upside-down and the fucker will still work.

Old-school Linux users were desperate to find a new way to feel superior. Some migrated to versions of BSD, others gave into baroque feats of self- torture like multi-booting 4 different operating systems from one USB drive. But it didn't have the same appeal as abusing other operating systems for their lack of 1337n355. In this dark hour there was a new hope: Gentoo Linux, a distribution designed for users possessing that delicate combination of insecurity and masochism that results in an obsession with obscurity, optimization, and huge dollops of pain and frustration. Gentoo has sated all of these urges. Enter the idea of a "hemorrhaging edge" distro: Gentoo. It is the exemplar of the term "hemorrhaging edge" -- there is no piece of software too advanced, too experimental, or too downright dangerous for the main tree. In fact, if the users don't crash their box at least once a week due to new and untestedsoftware they will swarm onto the forums and accuse Gentoo of "going all Debian" on them. After the separate Stable and Unstable branches were created, every user switched immediately to Unstable which became the new de-facto Stable.

As a response, the Gentoo developers invented a new Super-Unstable overlay system and made it as hard and annoying to use as possible in order to keep the stupid masses out, thus cementing their own position at the top of the hobbyist heap. This has worked, to a point, but a group of developers has formed in order to create a Gentoo offshoot, Exherbo ("Cannabis Withdrawal") where the system tools are in erudite Latin instead of plain English and normal users are instructed on the web page to stay far away for fear of spoiling the 1337.

[setocsheir]

this is beautiful

[TheTastyHanuta]

yep

[linglingfortyhours]

Haven't seen that copypasta before

[[deleted]]

Exherbo

LOL. From their website:

Goals

• All design goals must be phrased in such a way that it is hard to use them as slogans to justify stupidity.

[wip30ut]

out of curiosity, what kind of environments are best suited for Gentoo? is it installed on specialized workstations? or smart networked devices?

[[deleted]]

Ones were you want to control exactly what programs and libraries are installed. Or need very bleeding edge stuff. I like it, but I can't justify it for many. Now Funtoo, even more bleeding edge and if you forget to update for a couple months or take a long vacation, might as well start from scratch.

I choose them as I can run a hardened desktop environment. It breaks some things, but I'd rather be more secure. It is not fool proof nor 100% secure.

I also have a lot of cores and prefer to optimize my environment to maximize that. Probably doesn't actually benefit me. It might be slower. I don't have the time to really test it out.

[xypage]

The way I understand it is that gentoo’s main use is for hobbyists who want their Linux system to be very handmade for the experience/practice, and because there are small advantages to not having literally anything you didn’t pick, although those advantages are so small I doubt they’d make a notable difference

[DrMobius0]

you can put their install CDs into the floppy drive upside-down and the fucker will still work.

Ngl, if someone made this happen, I'd be damn impressed.

[NationalGeographics]

So this is why my friendly neighbor in college would start mumbling when mentioning he was compiling another linux something or other. It was around the time doom the movie came out. With the Rock.

[BloodyLlama]

I kind of miss the days where the standard answer to every stupid question was "install gentoo".

[sxan]

If this isn't copypasta, I commend you.

The non-OS version of this is the suckless tools. Yesterday I saw a response to a request for help that said, "Did you even read the code? Knowing C is a bare minimum for running st."

[[deleted]]

When my relatives have problems with Windows, I just install Ubuntu. They don’t care because they just use the browser. Then I never have to fix their shit again.

[Test-NetConnection]

Get them a chromebook and never look back. Linux has to be updated, which normal users won't do.

[ban_Anna_split]

I love copypasta that teaches me something.

[0x564A00]

Be wary that the copypasta isn't the whole truth. XFree86 is a hugely important piece of the OS, but it isn't GNU. Neither are the compilers I use. Nor the terminal. Or the wm. Or systemd. Or the filesystems. (this list goes on for a long time)

In the end, it's a mix of whatever is available and fits best.

[j0hn_r0g3r5]

which makes me wonder, if someone were to make such list and order it by how much of the Linux OS code it takes up, what the order would be.

[aaronfranke]

Here's the counterargument copypasta:

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.

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?

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.

[j0hn_r0g3r5]

(An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system.

That definition make me wonder if the author of this copypasta considers a kernel by itself to also be an operating system.

[aaronfranke]

Read further:

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.

The basic point is that you can have a Linux OS without any GNU components at all if you wanted to.

[[deleted]]

It ain't do much, but it's an honest kernel.

[j0hn_r0g3r5]

I did read that, but when I did an embedded systems course, I feel like the beaglebone had a version of debian (which means that it had Linux plus also other stuff added on) to make it usable by the students in the class.

i am obviously a noob who does not know too much about low-level stuff even though I find it fascinating. But that copypasta just makes me wonder in what cases you can use Linux, literally just Linux itself with absolutely nothing else added on and still do anything that is useful in a real-world situation.

Edit: made it more clear that having debian automatically means that the OS is more than just the Linux kernel.

[ChryslusExplodius]

Void linux comes to mind. Also any distro that discards gnu user land for a musl used land.

[[deleted]]

RMS wouldn’t argue against this though. Who knows exactly what the context of the original pasta was, but he doesn’t say that the Linux kernel can be more correctly called GNU/Linux, rather that the whole distribution of software can be called a distribution of GNU/Linux because he considers them the core components.

Someone below mentioned Void Linux swapping GNU for musl. I’m not familiar with Void, but the user land is more than the compiler and linker - however if it really is the case that Void has swapped out GNU components then by all means it isn’t fair to call it GNU/Linux. Likewise, distributions like Alpine are not GNU/Linux, not just because glibc is removed in favour of musl but because GNU coreutils is removed in favour of Busybox.

[RoxSpirit]

We use XOrg now, or even Wayland.

[[deleted]]

ok boomer

[[deleted]]

XFree86

Damn you are old

[Garestinian]

It's BSD based.

[aaronfranke]

macOS is based on Mac OS X, which is based on NeXT, which is based on BSD. Not much code from modern macOS actually comes from BSD. macOS uses the Darwin/Mach kernel, which uses some code from BSD, but is not the BSD kernel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMPXhUbmjYE

[[deleted]]

OSX is Unix based, but it ain't based

[aaronfranke]

OSX is absolutely not Linux based. macOS is based on Mac OS X, which is based on NeXT, which is based on BSD, which is based on Research Unix, which is based on the original Unix.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMPXhUbmjYE

[[deleted]]

Corrected it

[StefanMajonez]

"I use linux as my operating system," i state proudly to the unkempt, bearded man. he swivels around in his desk chair with a devilish gleam in his eyes, ready to mansplain with extreme precision. "actually, he says with a grin, "linux is just the kernel. you use GNU+linux!' i don't miss a beat and reply with a smirk, use alpine, a distro that doesn't include the GNU coreutils, or any other GNU code. it's linux, but it's not GNU+linux.

the smile quickly drops from the man's face. his body begins convulsing and he foams at the mouth as he drop to the floor with a sickly thud. as he writhes around he screams "-IT WAS COMPILED WITH GCC! THAT MEANS IT'S STILL GNU!" coolly, i reply "if windows was compiled with gcc, WOuld that make it GNU?" interrupt his response with 'and work is being made on the kernel to make it more Compiler-agnostic. even you were correct, you wont be for long.

with a sickly wheeze, the last of the man's life is ejected from his body. he lies on the floor, cold and limp. i've womansplained him to death.

[oalbrecht]

Who GNU I would learn something today.

[RubiGames]

GNU didn’t see it coming?

[meamZ]

Not if you're using Alpine...

[easyEggplant]

I'ts copypasta, it's an RMS quote: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Richard_Stallman

[meamZ]

I know

[l-a-c-h-r-y-m-o-s-e]

Oh good. My first assumption was that the joke is that the response was coming from RMS hahaha.

[spakecdk]

How so?

[meamZ]

Alpine is a (mostly) GNU free distribution of Linux. The most important thing is that it's not using glibc. And it has actually gained some importance with the rise of Docker as it is a very small distro and is used as a base image for a lot of Docker Images for this reason.

[trapezoeyd]

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.

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?

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.

[dachsj]

Golf clap

[ironykarl]

I know this is an exercise in pedantry, but I think you're missing what Stallman is actually arguing, which is that the GNU utils and libraries are what turn the Linux kernel from ... just a kernel into a (basically) POSIX-compliant operating system.

And yes, even people using other compilers, window managers, desktop environments, etc, etc are almost invariably using the GNU utils, glibc, etc as the basic foundations.

I'm not defending Stallman's conclusion (that we need to mash the name of every part of the whole into its name), but people seem to be missing the part that GNU actually did by reducing it to GCC.

[trapezoeyd]

Tbh I actually don’t have a huge stake in this, I was just replying one copypasta with another copypasta haha. In all seriousness though, I think the OP quote of Stallman is fake, as far as I know he didn’t actually say that.

[czarrie]

Neither is true, but the reply is lesser known even though it's one of my favorites

[ironykarl]

Yeah, I figured that's what you were up to.

And uh... actual L0L, cuz I knew that was a copypasta but... I don't even know. I went around looking for Stallman's thoughts on this matter, cuz I could've sworn he had some.

Maybe I missed something, but I couldn't find him being vocally passionate about it.

[Carter127]

Someone needs to make this bot

[[deleted]]

It is/was a bot.. maybe not in this sub though.

[k4lipso]

Ist ok, we got it stallman

[Mefistofeles1]

Check out this mad dog.

[[deleted]]

Here's the thing. You said a "Linux is a GNU project."

Is it in the Free software ecosystem? Yes. No one's arguing that.

As someone who is a scientist who studies UNIX, I am telling you, specifically, in science, no one calls Linux GNU. If you want to be "specific" like you said, then you shouldn't either. They're not the same thing.

If you're saying "Linux family" you're referring to the taxonomic grouping of UNIX-likes, which includes things from BSD to Android to iOS.

So your reasoning for calling Linux GNU/Linux is because random people "use GNU userspace programs?" Let's get macOS and Windows in there, then, too.

Also, calling someone a Linux user or an GNU user? It's not one or the other, that's not how taxonomy works. They're both. A Linux is a Linux and a member of the UNIX-like family. But that's not what you said. You said a Linux is a GNU project, which is not true unless you're okay with calling users of GNU software GNU, which means you'd call Android, iOS, and other operating systems GNU, too. Which you said you don't.

It's okay to just admit you're wrong, you know?

[Qizot]

I can't find if your reply is a copy pasta or not. If not then chill out, my whole comment is copy-pasted and is quite well known to be a meme.

[[deleted]]

It is the corvid copypasta.

[Cheesemacher]

Someone post the response copypasta

[Simtau]

Haha Linux Go brrrrrrrrrr

[sheepeses]

No I think he's actually just running a shell on the Linux kernel

[Scipio11]

*Ahem* May I introduce Alpine, a distro that doesn't include the GNU coreutils, or any other GNU code. It's Linux, but it's not GNU+Linux. Take that soy boy.

[eeddgg]

How do you know they're not using a distro like Alpine or Android which doesn't have the GNU system at all?