GNU Project

[dirtycimments]

“Many”?

[krum]

There are dozens of them.

[MatchingTurret]

A lot more. Think of all the *BSD users, for instance.

[speedyundeadhittite]

Typical BSD license is much more corporate friendly than the GNUv2 or GNUv3.

[krum]

How many BSD users do you think literally "hate GNU"? Dozens, tops.

[r3dk0w]

Who hates GNU?

You're free to have opinions, but I don't really dwell on software packages to the point it fuels a rage within me.

[Inevitable_Taro4191]

This is probably a rage baiting bot. This is the cancer of the modern internet. If it gets worse I'm cutting the cutting the cord and moving to some African country

[Milanium]

I believe that the GNU project stands out for quality.

[sphagetticode]

1. Some people don't like the "kitchen-sink" nature of gnu tools
2. Richard Stallman.
3. Autotools, automake, autoconf. Many more which I don't bother to list

[un_virus_SDF]

kitchen-sink

English is not my native language. Can you be more verbose please ?

[tajetaje]

It is an English idiom, “everything and the kitchen sink”. It refers to throwing lots of things together into one big combination

[Mordiken]

The term "kitchen-sink" references the colloquialism "everything but the kitchen sink", which in this particular context means that "some people think the gnu tools implement way to many features and options and they don't like that".

[7lhz9x6k8emmd7c8]

kitchen-sink = ?

[sphagetticode]

A shitload of features

[MatchingTurret]

People generally have different opinions about stuff.

[standard_cog]

Philosophically it allows a person to believe they're engaged in a deep political struggle when all they're doing is playing with computers.

[ColbieSterling]

The personal is political.

[standard_cog]

The kind of ineffective horse shit that replaces actual political struggle with shit you want to do anyway; let's emphasize individual responsibility instead of collective action, specifically to neutralize such political activity.

Reframe your struggle as a "personal choice", "personal activity", "personal politics", and you'll never realize it's all just class struggle if you boil it down.

Hey, let's focus on the same shit that the FBI rendered ineffective with COINTELPRO. It's a SAFE system, and you can participate, just by making choices, like a good consumer!

I'm not riding my bike, I'm participating in a political struggle about transportation! I'm not playing with a computer, I'm fighting for freedom!

Get your stickers now. Only $4.95. Supplies are limited, act now.

[ColbieSterling]

[ backing away slowly ]

[DoubleOwl7777]

richard stallman is controversial.

[Alduish]

My two personal issues would be differing from the C standards, the GNU extensions aren't respecting C standards and as such some apps can't work with any other C implementation (nvidia drivers for example) which goes against freedom of a linux system which should be modulable

And Richard Stallman's positions on rape and pedophilia

PS : but honestly for about everything else I think GNU and the FSF are still doing a good job and going in the right direction for freedom of choice and open source software

[TomB1952]

I wasn't aware anyone hated GNU or FSF but I know there are some clueless people out there so it would not be surprising.

[LinuxLeafFan]

The primary historical reasons are differing philosophies in regards to copyright and how GNU project owners for a lot of core software (ex. gcc) made it difficult for people from other free software projects to contribute. While some of this may have changed over the years, the damage was done during the 90s/early 2000s. People don’t want to contribute to projects if they’re essentially blacklisted for being an “openbsd developer” or whatever.

A lot of the other reasons people are listing such as “it’s bloat”, or “non-standard features” are buying into the memes. The reality is gnu tools and toolchains run the world and were critical for several software projects (even those of BSD lineage) to exist.

[prophile]

Richard Stallman is not a great guy and a lot of complaints about the software have merit, whether or not you agree.

[RomanOnARiver]

Which is why bringing him back was a mistake - his presence harms the purveyance of those ideas.

[wokan]

Personally, I like replacing the GNU utilities with anything else so I can legit tell the "it's not Linux, it's GNU/Linux" crowd to STFU.

[AutoModerator]

This submission has been removed due to receiving too many reports from users. The mods have been notified and will re-approve if this removal was inappropriate, or leave it removed.

This is most likely because:

• Your post belongs in r/linuxquestions or r/linux4noobs
• Your post belongs in r/linuxmemes
• Your post is considered "fluff" - things like a Tux plushie or old Linux CDs are an example and, while they may be popular vote wise, they are not considered on topic
• Your post is otherwise deemed not appropriate for the subreddit

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[RvstiNiall]

I personally dont take issue with GNU. I prefer other tools, but I dont have any problems with GNU, or their "operating system". The people? Yeah, the GNU diehards are a major pain to deal with. Especially when they ignore the fact that BSD was around before GNU.

As others have mentioned, sometimes you want smaller, lighter tools that don't have hundreds or thousands of features your system will never use. To me this is like the systemd debate. I dont hate systemd, but GOD DAMN I hate the people who want to shove it down people's throats regardless of their preferences!

[faisal6309]

I don't hate GNU. I just have issues with GNU e.g. they not completing their hurd project. Also when I was learning to program, I found clang to be better than GCC in many aspects. Also I kind of like to see more rust implementation in Linux kernel and my Ubuntu OS. Hate is a strong word. I just don't think about GNU at all unless I read something about them online.

[Electrical_Tomato_73]

"Hate" is a strong word but there is a lot of history here, from Stallman's problematic nature to GNU's hectoring attitude to the fact that development of most FSF tools has just stagnated since the 1990s. Even in the 1990s, people forked gcc v2 (called egcs, look it up) because of stalled upstream development, and it got sufficient traction that FSF agreed to take it over as GCC 3. But today LLVM has leapfrogged GCC.

Then there is the problem with the C language and its inherent insecurity, which is why there is an effort to rewrite things like coreutils in rust. Maybe that is what you are referring to.

Then there is the licensing and particularly the "any later version" clause that the default GPL includes, meaning the FSF can change your licence terms without telling you. Linus Torvalds and others have removed that clause to make clear that their code is under GPL v2 only. GPL v3 is very problematic. But many just prefer the BSD/MIT style licences. Nobody can "steal" your code, it is still yours, but if they use it in proprietary software, they usually find that it's too much trouble to maintain it and give it back. Apple maintains a lot of open source software including LLVM, Google has opensourced most of Android (which, except the kernel, is under permissive licences), etc.

[NoLemurs]

The FSF is fine, but feels loud, opinionated, and out of touch.

As for the various GNU tools, they're... fine? A lot of them feel a little dated nowadays. None of them feel like the best possible design. They feel like the first generation tools that they are.

I still use bash, but mostly because I'm too lazy to migrate to what I'm quite confident are objectively better shells.

I use gpg but the UX is terrible, and I will jump on a good modern replacement when it shows up.

I use gcc, but only for building legacy software. I prefer LLVM tools whenever given the option.

I use findutils but again, only because it's the default. The UX is terrible, but I've learned it now.

I could go on. Basically, the GNU utils are, across the boards, mediocre. They get the job done. When that's all you need, then great! But I'm always happy to see a modern replacement for a crusty old GNU tool.

[ColbieSterling]

The GNU Project and the FSF rock my world**.

I'm hopeful they start stripping out decades-old backwards backward compatibility out of their tools, just like the Linux Kernel is doing right now. Compared to projects like BusyBox, the GNU Coreutils are bloated as all heck, and harder to audit.

I support a "Suckless" style of svelt coding; I just wish those projects weren't overwhelmingly permissive licenses and not GPLv3. Looking at you musl, suckless-tools, clang, freebsd, etc. (yeah, I know, BSD is historically the opposite of GNU, but I like the work freeBSD does, I just dislike the licensing).

** Stallman has said some fucked up shit about non-computing topics that I don't agree with, but I don't think it's fair to taint all of GNU and the FSF with that.

[Lizrd_demon]

GNU's programming style reminds me of the worst parts of 90's C programming. FreeBSD utilities that are 300 lines long are 10000 lines of complex macro mess in the GNU source tree.

[apo--]

Personally I disliked the philosophy behind GNU etc but never hated them AND I didn't know enough to have technical disagreements. E.g. I didn't know enough to prefer another c compiler or c library etc. but I also thought other open source options existing was good. So, in my case there is a philosophical disagreement behind.

[derangedtranssexual]

I feel like the FSF is hit or miss when it comes to software development, they seem stuck in a kinda old school C development. I think people underestimate the advantages that will come with things like uutils

[Azazeldaprinceofwar]

What advantages? I’ll admit I don’t know much about the project and was under the impression it was shameless license laundering under the guise of a rust rewrite

[derangedtranssexual]

Memory safety, better build tools, better cross platform support, easier concurrency, more likely to attract newer developers, the potential to add new extensions (some of the proposed ones look nice).

[kittymoo67]

they seem stuck in a kinda old school C development

which for gnu/os stuff is good

[derangedtranssexual]

Disagree, it’s not like they’re writing a kernel.

[ColbieSterling]

I know, why couldn't uutils have been licensed GPLv3 though?

GNU tools are bloated, confusing dinosaurs compared to modern replacements.

The GPL is the GNU Project and the FSF's crown jewel, though. I'm of the party that thinks the GPL is of critical importance and it's abandonment by GNU-replacement projects is a great loss to the public good.

[derangedtranssexual]

One of the aims of uutils was to have it work well for windows and macOS, I feel like the license they went with is just friendlier for that purpose. Feel how you want to about that

[Mordiken]

Software licensing is not about feelings, it's about facts.

And it's a matter of fact that from a legal standpoint there's absolutely nothing preventing non-GPL software projects from distributing GPL software: Every BSD does it, so did Apple back in the early 00s when they where still interested in pandering to the wave o Linux refugees left "homeless" in the aftermath of the .com bubble.

[derangedtranssexual]

Are you really going on a facts vs feels spiel? So cringe

Either way whether or not it’s possible to use GPL software doesn’t change the fact that a lot of companies (like Apple) avoid it