Robert A. Uhl

It’s fairly well-known that I’ve been opposed to calling Linux systems GNU/Linux: I have thought — and still do think — that it’s silly and incorrect (as there is more to a typical system than simply GNU and Linux). OTOH, I’ve noticed in my interactions with my peers (I’m a Unix admin by day) that there’s a mass assumption that the GNU toolset is identical to Linux. Recently I heard an otherwise well-informed man refer to Cygwin as ‘the Linux toolset on Windows.’ Now, this is just flat-out incorrect: Cygwin is a compilation of almost entirely GNU tools (it may be completely GNU, actually). Of course, I cannot blame the fellow, as on Cygwin’s own site they refer to the project as ‘a Linux-like environment for Windows’, which while not entirely inaccurate (it is like Windows, after all) is not entirely accurate either.

Why does this matter? Quite simply, the Free Software Foundation have spent decades (literally) on re-implementing the Unix userland tools as free software (that’s free-as-in-freedom, not free-as-in-price). RMS — for all his many flaws — has invested a lot of time, sweat and lost opportunities in the GNU toolset; of course, he is far from the only one. I can very much understand how hurtful it can be when folks confuse one’s work for another’s, and how one would wish for proper attribution.

What’s the solution? Well, it’s not to use the phrase ‘GNU/Linux’; that’s unfair to the myriads of other projects whose code is used in a modern Linux system. What is appropriate it to emphasise the contributions of the GNU Project. Red Hat should link to ’em; SuSE should link to ’em; we users need to realise that much of what we love about our Linux systems is not Linux itself (it’s just a fairly decent OS), but the operating environment which the GNU tools give us (an ls which doesn’t suck, a sh which doesn’t suck, a grep which doesn’t suck, a chmod which doesn’t suck, an awk which doesn’t suck, & cetera, & cetera, & cetera).

Actually, I tend to believe that systems such as Apple’s Mac OS might help. Not only is it not free, it is fundamentally BSDish (as opposed to GNUish, not AT&Tish): this means that its tools suck.

What other Unix vendors need to do is start using the GNU tools. The FSF need to relax that one point of the GPL: allow vendors to distribute copies of GPLed software with the OS. Demand that the software itself remain GPLed, of course, but allow AIX, Solaris & HP-UX to move into the 20th century. With competition from Linux and (someday) the HURD, they won’t remain proprietary forever, and in the short term we all benefit.

What we need to do is remember the contributions of the FSF. Next time you’re using software that doesn’t suck, thank RMS. Thank the FSF. Thank God that even an atheist supporter of infanticide could be used toward so good an end.