×

Pages

Labels

Search

×

Pages

×
×

Notice

The site is currently undergoing scheduled maintenance, and may not function correctly. Please come back later.

Advertisement

advertisement

Referring To Linux Operating Systems As Linux VS GNU/Linux VS GNU+Linux VS GNU-Linux

Over the years there has been something of a debate by the gnulinux community on which term is best. Like most people, when I first entered the world of linux operating systems, I used the term Linux to refer to operating systems comprised of GNU (a system), and Linux (a kernel). As I learned more, I switched primarily to using GNU/Linux instead, because I liked that it clarified I wasn't talking about Linux (the kernel). Since then I've done some more reading, and some more thinking on it. To me, it seems mostly to be about definition scope, and abiding rules of the English language. So here's what I've come up with. This is just my opinion.

Linux is a product name for a kernel created by Linus Torvolds, and linux is a type of operating system which uses Linux (the kernel). The difference is capitalization. Product names are capitalized in English, terms are not except where required by circumstance (eg: start of a sentence, in a title, etc). While there is some potential for confusion, most of the time when people use Linux (or linux) they aren't talking about the kernel, and if they are it's fairly common practice to clarify by using "Linux kernel". Even the Linux's (the kernel) official website FAQ page does this.

GNU is an acronymn (supposedly, but this is debatable since it includes punctuation!) for GNU's Not Unix!, which is the product name of a system created by GNU (the organization). Most of the time when people use GNU they are referring to the organization. GNU (the organization) does put forth "GNU" as a term for operating systems comprised of GNU (the system), and Linux (the kernel), calling it "the shortest legitimate name". However this meaning is not used by anyone, even GNU (the organization). It also isn't valid English. They state it's a name, but names don't have definitions. Names refer to an exact thing. On the other hand if we consider it a term, it still isn't valid English. In English terms are not capitalized like this. Acronyms are, and abbreviations can be. We know this isn't an abbreviation though, because the GNU (the organziation) states on their website that GNU is an acronymn. Acronyms don't have definitions. They stand for something. So again this is not valid English. Gnu (as in "gnu") is a type of operating system which uses GNU (the system). This term is not used by anyone.

GNU/Linux is not a term. A forward slash typically means "or", but it can also (as it has been here) mean "and" which allows for creation of lists. GNU/Linux means "GNU and Linux". Since it isn't a word, it has no definition. It is a reference to the products Linux (the kernel), and GNU (the system). This is an important thing to understand, because saying "I use GNU/Linux" means "I use GNU and Linux", but it doesn't mean for sure that you are using them together. It could, but it could also merely mean you use both. Therefore this list is valid, but not equivalent to a term like gnulinux which refers to a single thing. GNU/Linux is widely used, but mostly incorrectly as a term.

Gnu-linux (as in "gnu-linux") is a type of operating system which uses Linux (the kernel), and GNU (the system). Lack of capitalization is important to note here. Gnu-linux is a hyphenated term created by connecting two words with a hyphen. Terms created in this manner, if used enough, typically evolve into a word of their own, where the hyphen is no longer present (eg: "gnulinux"). Usage of this term is rare, and it is not used in unhyphenated form presently. GNU-Linux (with capitals) would be a product name (if it existed) presumibly for a product created from a combination of both GNU (the system), and Linux (the kernel).

GNU+Linux is not valid English, because plus symbols are used with numbers not words.

LiGNUx is not valid English, because it breaks the rules of capitalization. This word was promoted by GNU (the organization), but wasn't significantly adopted by the gnulinux community. This "term" is also promotionally biased towards GNU (the system), because not only is it kept whole (unlike Linux), but is capitalized to stand out.

GliNUx is not valid English, because it breaks the rules of capitalization. This "term" is not used, and even the GNU (the organization) dislikes it. It is also promotionally biased in favour of the GNU since G, N, and U are the only capitalized letters.

Lign is a type of operating system containing both Linux (the kernel), and GNU (the system). In truth, I just made this term up, but don't be too quick to dismiss it. It's easy to pronounce (said the same way as line). The word lign doesn't appear in any major dictionary so, it is available for adoption. It's shorter than options like gnulinux which, is one of the reasons why many people choose to say Linux. The manner in which it is formed (combinding "li" from Linux, and "gn" from GNU) is a common way of creating new words. Lign has the advantage of not containing Linux which is trademarked.

To summarize, as long as the term you're using is common, I really don't think it matters which one you use. 99% of the time people will know exactly what you mean. There's really no point in nit-picking over accuracy when it clearly isn't needed. However, if I was to do so, my opinion would be that Linux is a kernel created by Linus Torvolds, linux is a type of operating system which uses the Linux kernel, gnu-linux is a type of operating system which uses both the GNU system and Linux kernel (though you might as well say gnulinux since nothing is gained by the hyphen), and lign (which means that same as gnulinux) is reasonable alternative term which is free of Linux trademark concerns. My prefered term is gnulinux at present.

Authors:James Daniel Marrs Ritchey
License:Ritchey Permissive License v8

Ritchey Permissive License v8:

You means the person, or legal entity exercising permissions granted by this license. Provider means a person (or legal entity) using permissions granted by this license to share the material. Permissions are revoked permanently upon breach of this license. Subject to the terms of this license, any person (or legal entity) is hereby granted otherwise irrevocable royalty-free permission to do anything with material provided under this license. The material is provided as is, without warranties of any kind, guarantees of any kind, or implied fitness for any purpose. The authors, owners, and providers will not be held responsible for anything caused by the material. When sharing the material with others you take on all responsibilities of and relating to consequences (including warranties, implied warranties, guarantees, liabilities, and damages), including those which would normally be the responsibility of the owner, between you and those directly and indirectly receiving the material from you. The material must remain solely under this license. This license is to be upheld in Canada, subject to the laws of Canada, as they were on April 21, 2019. You must be legally capable of being bound to all the requirements of this license, and by using the material you agree to be. The license text is provided under these terms.

Advertisment

advertisement
Copyright © James Daniel Marrs Ritchey.

Siteviews