Since Linux distributions are actually GNU operating systems with a Linux kernel, there's no reason it doesn't make sense to try a GNU operating system with a GNU kernel.
Hurd predates Linux, it isn't architecturally different from Linux, Linux is architecturally different from it - but almost none of the runtime cares if it is running on a modular monolithic kernel (Linux) or a microkernel (Hurd, Minix, Mach).
I'm probably being over-pedantic here, but you know that technically the kernel is the OS, right? The userspace tools are not the operating system. So Linux distributions are Linux operating systems, with tools from the GNU project.
Back to your sentiment, yeah it makes sense for all things GNU to be able to work with each other. That's one of the biggest benefits of this Debian project.
Yes. The name argument really should be laid to rest now since the "linux OS" has died and been replaced by distributions.
I don't run linux, I run Debian. Debian might include packages from GNU, Linux, BSD, HURD, KDE, GNOME, US, EU, and X, but do I call the OS any of those?
Static operative systems with packages from only one source is a thing of the past.
Well, OS is broader than the kernel. I agree with you that Linux is not "a GNU OS," but mostly because only a small portion of any given linux distribution is GNU or couldn't easily be replaced by nearly identical non-GNU components. Certainly once you get into using something like KDE, the bulk of your environment is not in any way part of the GNU project.
Comments
Since Linux distributions are actually GNU operating systems with a Linux kernel, there's no reason it doesn't make sense to try a GNU operating system with a GNU kernel.
Hurd predates Linux, it isn't architecturally different from Linux, Linux is architecturally different from it - but almost none of the runtime cares if it is running on a modular monolithic kernel (Linux) or a microkernel (Hurd, Minix, Mach).
I'm probably being over-pedantic here, but you know that technically the kernel is the OS, right? The userspace tools are not the operating system. So Linux distributions are Linux operating systems, with tools from the GNU project.
Back to your sentiment, yeah it makes sense for all things GNU to be able to work with each other. That's one of the biggest benefits of this Debian project.
I used to argue that.
Android's largely convinced me otherwise.
(Android isn't a Linux OS so far as I'm concerned).
Yes. The name argument really should be laid to rest now since the "linux OS" has died and been replaced by distributions.
I don't run linux, I run Debian. Debian might include packages from GNU, Linux, BSD, HURD, KDE, GNOME, US, EU, and X, but do I call the OS any of those?
Static operative systems with packages from only one source is a thing of the past.
According to whose techne?
This really all boils down to opinions, nothing else.
Well, OS is broader than the kernel. I agree with you that Linux is not "a GNU OS," but mostly because only a small portion of any given linux distribution is GNU or couldn't easily be replaced by nearly identical non-GNU components. Certainly once you get into using something like KDE, the bulk of your environment is not in any way part of the GNU project.
I think you may be forgetting glibc :). It certainly doesn't fall under the rubric of "easy to replace" -- although it's certainly possible.