The greatest debate of our time

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.

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.
- 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
- But did you add 3 characters? Gotta bump up that code count bruh.
- Theres an ancient Apple story about how LoC is a stupid metric from when they were programming the Lisa.
I wrote a program that does nothing but busy loop on all cores. stylist_trend/Linux is my favourite OS.
- i’m partial to the more relaxing sleep(500)/linux os, but to each their own
Then this: :(){ :|:& };: is most important code in existence.
- What you refer to as Linux, is actually called Forkbomb/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calli-[Process Killed]
No, he doesn't. He suggests that there are Linux systems with no GNU code, like one I'm replying from, and whether "no" meant "no SLOC" or "no instructions spent executing" or "no packages" absolutely doesn't matter.

Ubuntu: "Linux"
Fedora: "Linux"
Arch: "Linux"
Gentoo: "Linux"
Slackware: "Linux"
Debian: "Free Operating System"

There's more truth to that than most people realize: Linux is only one kernel option in Debian:

Debian GNU/kFreeBSD

Debian GNU/NetBSD

Debian GNU/Hurd
Debian: "Libre Operating System"

FTFY
- Lifree

But the compiler is GNU!

If you compile windows with GCC is it gnu/windows?

So, how's Hurd doing these days? If they want their own operating system, maybe they should release version 1.0 of their kernel.

There are distros without GNU, like alpine.

Without glibc and coreutils (by default), not without gnu.

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

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

It gets more complicated with microkernels, though because you literally can't run anything without some important processes running in userspace.
- That's a good point, thank you for your time
SystemD/Linux
I ca GNU
- I mean I don't think there must be a heated debate about it you know. You can call it GNU because you probably value more GNU, some others call it GNU/Linux and some Linux. It's okay as long as it's understandable

obligatory

Well, no surprise they have more lines of code. And that's even if you disregard printing help.
That's how they get more lines of code.

This is why Windows users don’t switch.

I used Linux for many years, I still run it for my personal projects. I'm sure it's not everyone but damn the community is toxic as hell to newbies. If something doesn't work it's your fault. Don't know what flatpak is? You're an idiot. How do I use X? Don't use X it sucks but also I won't provide alternatives. Linux just works now open up terminal and type these flags to mount your external drive correctly so other programs can see it.

I love the power and customization but it's a confusing world at times with unhelpful people.
- I mean X does suck. Unfortunately, it's still the better choice sometimes. At least Wayland is clearly better than the other X.
- If you're asking how to do something, and most of the responses are "why would you want to do that?" It means you can't do it.
- This has been pretty much my experience with every time I've gotten the "Linux" itch...
  
  It's so bad that most of the time googling doesn't help because the top twenty results are just someone else getting shit on for asking the same question.
Some guy got mad at me for referring to linux as GNU/Linux in a post clearly making fun of him for being a huge shit head to someone earnestly trying to do something on Linux and failing. Never address any of the criticisms, just called me an idiot and a liar. SOME linux users are their own worst enemy if they want wider adoption.
- I once asked for a clarification on a tutorial I found, and the only reply I got was berating me for trying to use systemd.

busybox, musl and llvm enter the room

holds up linux os without gnu software WHATS THIS THEN HUH?!

Gnun't/Linux
- GNL (GNU isn't Linux) / Linux

So much corporate bootlicking in this thread. People don't seem to know what GNU and Linux actually stand for and the importance of the free software movement, all they see is a fancy Windows alternative where they can run the same stupid proprietary programs and in the end contribute to the loss of software freedom just as much as a useless Microsoft consumer. People here are even openly hostile to GNU despite it being possibly the most important component in ensuring that free software remains free. I feel like our operating systems are being hijacked by little children with no responsibility for which GNU/Linux only serves mundane, corporately induced needs, and they don't see the political and idealistic dimension at all.