Some examples:

  • Android
  • Alpine: Alpine Linux is built around musl libc and busybox
  • glaucus: A simple and lightweight Linux distribution based on musl libc and toybox
  • Chimera (alpha stage): Chimera uses a novel combination of core tools from FreeBSD, the LLVM toolchain, and the Musl C library
    • jack@monero.town
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I was not talking about the technical aspects, although there is much more GNU code than Linux code in most GNU/Linux distros.

      doesn’t change how Linux should be named or referenced

      Of course the kernel should be referred to as Linux, anything else would be inaccurate :)

        • jack@monero.town
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          the implication that any popular piece of libre software owes anything to Stallman by the mere virtue of being libre is totally wrong.

          Considering Linux: Linux was proprietary at first, until Torvalds was inspired by the free software movement to free it, even using GNU’s GPL. He later said that making Linux open source was the best decision he ever made, and I’m pretty sure that this would not have happened without the popularity of GNU and the movement reaching him. Linux would’ve been just another small proprietary kernel. So Torvalds owes a lot to Stallman.

          Also, without GNU, Linux would not have been practically usable. Only after the hard work of combining Linux with the already huge codebase of GNU could Linux be meaningfully used and become popular.

          In fact, Stallman’s version of “open” is deeply intertwined with the American version of what it means to be “free” politically

          Well, “open source” gives you exactly the same freedoms as “free software” gives you, so proponents of “open source” can’t be that far off ideologically.

          it has manifested so many times that there are several open projects with the entire goal of not using GNU components, code or licenses.

          The code is already there and it’s usable. Not using it because you don’t like the person/organization seems a bit… misguided.

            • jack@monero.town
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              What a lazy response. You do realize that only one paragraph was an argument for calling it GNU/Linux and the rest of the comment regards other topics you yourself brought up in your last comment? Obviously it is not worth talking to you any longer, not because of diverging views but because of your manners…