• MooseBoys@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Right? Most of the time when I build linux I’m not using GNU because of its burdensome license. Realistically you usually don’t need most of the binaries anyway, and those you do like echo and ls are trivial to reimplement, at least for their common functionality.

    • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      That might be difficult.

      Linux was made to run GNU software, and is borderline part of GNU. GNU, likewise, is made open, much like the Linux kernel, so it can run on anything.

      I don’t know of any software designed for the Linux kernel that doesn’t also expect GNU.

      Look, all I’m saying is that the two are very strongly bonded, like hydrogen and oxygen in a molecule of water. It would take a lot of energy to separate them. Adding to them is pretty trivial, there’s a lot of things that are water soluble by default, but without specific conditions and a lot of energy, they won’t seperate easily.

      Honestly, I think the only OS I know of that’s the closest to being Linux but not GNU, is Android.

      • dukk@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Alpine Linux exists. But yeah, most of these projects pretty much do the same thing as their GNU counterparts, just outside the license.

      • bruhduh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Wayland can’t run on BSD as I’ve heard so GNU can’t run on anything, i may be wrong though, because my source is posts on internet, but as I’ve heard BSD users want x-server support to continue