• glibg10b@lemmy.ml
    1004·
    2 years ago

    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.

    • stylist_trend@lemmy.world
      201·
      2 years ago

      I wrote a program that does nothing but busy loop on all cores. stylist_trend/Linux is my favourite OS.

    • Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.world
      14·
      2 years ago

      Can confirm it’s a shitty metric. I once saved the company I was working at few millions by changing one line of code. And it took 3 days to find it. And it was only 3 characters changed.

      • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
        7·
        2 years ago

        That’s the curse and blessing of our profession: efficiency of work is almost impossible to measure once you go beyond very simple code.

        You can feel like a hero for changing three characters and finally fixing that nasty, or you can feel like an absolute disgrace for needing days to find such a simple fix. Your manager employs the same duality of judgement

        • Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.world
          3·
          2 years ago

          I feel like a hero in this particular case, it was a bug in a code that was written when I was still too young to even read. And no one knew how to run it. We didn’t have access to the pipelines so no one knew how to build it and how to run it. It was a very obscure hybrid of C and PHP. I basically had to be the compiler, I went line by line through the whole codebase, searching for the code path that caused the error. Sounds easy enough, right? Just CTRL+click in your IDE. Wouldn’t it be a shame if someone decided that function names should be constructed as a string using at least 20 levels of nesting where each layer adda something to the function name and then it’s finally called. TL;DR it was a very shitty code.

      • Gork@lemm.eeOP
        1·
        2 years ago

        But did you add 3 characters? Gotta bump up that code count bruh.

      • stylist_trend@lemmy.world
        11·
        2 years ago

        What you refer to as Linux, is actually called Forkbomb/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calli-[Process Killed]

  • style99@kbin.social
    521·
    2 years ago

    Ubuntu: “Linux”
    Fedora: “Linux”
    Arch: “Linux”
    Gentoo: “Linux”
    Slackware: “Linux”
    Debian: “Free Operating System”

  • tired_n_bored@lemmy.world
    17·
    2 years ago

    I honestly never cared about this, it’s the first time I write something about that, but any Linux-based OS is made of countless different software. What limits the number of names to two? Why can’t I call my OS OpenVPN/Gnu/Linux, then why not Wayland/OpenVPN/Gnu/Linux? That would be crazy. A single recognizable name is what makes it.

    Furthermore by definition an operating system is an interface between userspace applications to the hardware, hence the operating system should be just Linux.

    Not shitting on GNU at all, but this push for calling the OS Gnu/Linux seems futile

      • nottheengineer@feddit.de
        8·
        2 years ago

        Implementation is the actual code with the logic that does the thing you want it do, as opposed to the command, which is how you tell the system what it should do.

        The command can be the same on multiple OSs, but the implementation can be different.

        In case of Linux and the coreutils (which are the basic programs you need beside the kernel to make a functioning system, stuff like mkdir) the most common implementation of all the coreutils is the one made by GNU. Stallmann did a lot of work on that so he wants credit for making a big part of the OS.

      • ziggurism@lemmy.world
        8·
        2 years ago

        It shows that Unix’s implementation of echo uses 10 lines of code, other *nixen use 60 to 100, and gnu uses 250. The implication being, I suppose, that GNU has such a high line of code count because it’s very verbose or padded

    • WhoRoger@lemmy.worldEnglish
      72·
      2 years ago

      Cuz like, GNU was the thing before Linux, so I’d say that’s pretty important.

        • WhoRoger@lemmy.worldEnglish
          31·
          2 years ago

          Why? Both parts of GNU/Linux are important. Open source is all about collaboration. It doesn’t need to conform to the neat capitalist OS ideas with one monolithic corporate creator and one user-friendly name.

          • mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            1·
            2 years ago

            Some people call just linux so… Also GNU is easier to say than GNU/Linux right? Thats the same argument made by people who say just “linux”.

            Open source is all about collaboration

            Free software is all about freedom. Nothing wrong with any of them tho

    • Ddhuud@lemmy.world
      1·
      2 years ago

      Been running a Linux based os for coming up on twenty years. I still definitely do not care about this.

  • NormalC@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    71·
    2 years ago

    The shortest proper name is GNU.

    Inb4 Alpine, which is just called “Linux” internally.

    People use terrible words in CS and engineering in general. Doesn’t mean we don’t challenge them.

      • NormalC@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        0·
        2 years ago

        And hardware can’t talk to it. Has it ever occurred to you that there’s more at stake here? That companies feel the need to lock away hardware in order to drive their profit line.

        At least GNU has something interesting to say about computer science. And for what it’s worth, it’s telling to know that you woild rather disparage GNU rather than the purposeful decisions made by executives and manufactuers to render both hardware and software undocumented and subjugating.

        But no! That’s “unfixable” and we need to learn how to “deal with it.” God forbid anyone makes a ruckus about it. Freedom for me but not for thee in this fast paced economy.

        You picked the status quo and are now complaining that people reject the status quo.

        • Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.world
          0·
          2 years ago

          I feel like you misunderstood. Operating system has many functions, one of the most important ones is talking to hardware. GNU cannot do that because that’s the kernel’s job. And the kernel is Linux. So they claim they’re an operating system but can’t do the most fundamental thing an operating system needs to do.

            • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
              0·
              2 years ago

              no. gnu does have a kernel. But it’s not linux. it’s called gnu hurd. It is actually about a year older than linux. It isn’t finished, and barely anyone uses it

                • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
                  0·
                  2 years ago

                  just, no. linux is simply not a gnu project. at all.

                  If it were, we wouldn’t be hearing about them wanting to call it gnu/linux because, in their own words, the os is “gnu with linux added”

                  they’d just want to call it gnu.

                  a very quick google search could have told you that