The Many Faces of Linux

Mozillaquest.com ^ | 28 August 2005 | Mike Angelo

[N3WBI3]

There are many faces of Linux, a term which has come to mean many things. Underneath all the things that Linux is, it is an operating system kernel. Under the Linux Faces

The term Linux also is applied to the popular GNU operating system (OS) built on top of the Linux kernel, often simply called the Linux OS. Then on top of that are the Linux-based distributions that usually and simply are called Linux distributions, such as Mandriva Linux, Red Hat Linux, or SUSE Linux. Please see Figure 1 in the right sidebar

There are lots of Linux-based, operating system, distributions and they wear many faces too.

* Some are command-line only Linux-based OS distributions.

* Some are developed specially for server platforms.

* Some are designed for GUI desktop use.

* Yet others combine command-line, server, desktop, and enterprise functionality into a single Linux-based OS distribution package.

One problem with all this nomenclature is that it is very confusing. How do you know when someone says Linux if they are talking about:

* the kernel, * the operating system, * the desktop, * a distribution, * or whatever?

Of course the context in which Linux is used helps to let you know which of these many faces of Linux is the one to which reference is made. The GNU and Linux Controversy

Don't forget all the controversy about calling the Linux-based operating system GNU/Linux. The Free Software Foundation people, that's Richard Stallman and the GNU people, say that the Linux-based operating system in use today should be called GNU/Linux.

That's because much of the software that surrounds the Linux kernel to make it an operating system is GNU software, which it is by the way. Please see Figure 1 in the right sidebar.

However, Richard Stallman (rms) disagreed with our characterization of FSF's position in an e-mail discussion:

Richard M. Stallman: Actually no, that is not what we say. What we say is that this system is basically the GNU operating system, with Linux added.

Please see the GNU Note in the right sidebar on page 2 for more about this. Is Linux More than Merely a Kernel?

On the other hand, the people at Linux International say that Linux is an operating system, not just the Linux kernel:

Linux is an Operating System, which acts as a communication service between the hardware (or physical equipment of a computer) and the software (or applications which use the hardware) of a computer system. (What is Linux?, Linux International Website. Link in the Resources section at the end of the article on page 3.)

The people at kernel.org seem to go even further into using Linux to mean more than just the kernel, using the term Linux system:

the kernel . . . is just a component in a working Linux system. (New to Linux?, The Linux Kernel Archives. Link in the Resources section at the end of the article on page 3.)

Jon "maddog" Hall is a well-known Linux advocate, speaker, author, and also the Executive Director of Linux International (LI). We discussed that LI definition of Linux and other issues covered in this article with Jon while preparing this article. He noted:

Jon "maddog" Hall: When I first got involved with "Linux", people just called the whole OS (or for that matter the whole distribution) "Linux". "Give me that Linux CD", was the phrase, whether the CD included MySQL(TM), Postgres(TM), or the X Window System(TM). It was not "Linux International" who started calling the whole distribution "Linux". That was happening before LI was even created in 1994. The community was calling it that.

Linux Trademark Issues

Add to all this the recent endeavors of Linus Torvalds to enforce his Linux trademark. These trademark enforcement endeavors appear to be directed to applying the term Linux to all that stuff that is built on top of the Linux kernel, not to the kernel itself. Please see the Linux Trademark Note in the right sidebar.

During our discussions about the issues covered in this article with Jon "maddog" Hall, he further clarified the Linux trademark issues:

The trademark enforcement is not "directed" at anything other than the use of the term "Linux" in a name. However the creator of the name in question used the word "Linux" in a product name, then they should at least have given proper attribution to the "Linux" part, and they may have to sublicense it.

If you called your database the "Linux Relational Database", then we would ask you to give proper attribution to the word "Linux" and sublicense the use of the Linux name. So the trademark endeavors have nothing to do with the actual code or what the name really refers to .... it is just that someone decided to use the name, and they should properly attribute the owner. If they make money off the name, they should help to defend the Mark by sub-licensing it.

Using Linux and Linux-Based to Name Things

So, maybe it is about time for everyone to start being lots more careful about how we use the term Linux. That would make it clear when one is referring to:

* the Linux kernel, * the GNU/Linux operating system, * any other Linux-based operating system, * a Linux-based desktop, * a Linux-based distribution, * or whatever.

Here is some food for thought about that. How about the term Linux, when used by itself, be used to refer to the Linux kernel? That's the operating system kernel developed and maintained by Linus Torvalds and the kernel.org people.

That's not a new idea. It's just that over time most, if not all, of us have gotten very sloppy about the way we label lots more than just the Linux kernel as Linux.

When the term Linux is used in conjunction with Linux-based OSs, Linux-based distributions, or whatever, then they should be called Linux-based. For example the Linux-based GNU operating system would be called more or less what Richard Stallman and the FSF people have been saying all along, the Linux-based, GNU operating system.

Richard Stallman is the founder of the GNU Project, President of the Free Software Foundation (FSF), and a well-known author. We discussed this article during its preparation with Richard M. Stallman (rms). He noted in respect to the above paragraph that the name should include more than just Linux-based.

That seems to mean that GNU should be part of the name when one refers to an item that includes or is built on top of the Linux kernel and the GNU operating system based upon the Linux kernel.

Richard M. Stallman: Distinguishing "Linux-based" from "Linux" would be a step forward in clarity, but using that as the only term used to describe what a system or distribution is would still be misleading . . .

Please see the GNU Note in the right sidebar for more about this.

Incidentally, there also is another GNU operating system that is not based on the Linux kernel. It's based on GNU's Hurd kernel and called the GNU/Hurd operating system.

The same idea for naming operating systems goes for naming Linux-based distributions, too. Perhaps they could have names such as SUSE OS, a Linux-based GNU operating system, or The Mandriva Linux-based GNU OS. Those of course would be the more formal names.

In short, they still would simply be called Mandriva or SUSE, or perhaps Mandriva OS and SUSE OS -- but not merely Mandriva Linux or SUSE Linux. Likewise, perhaps Fedora and Red Hat ought to be referred to as Fedora OS and Red Hat OS rather than Fedora Linux and Red Hat Linux.

Some variations here perhaps could be product names such as SUSE Professional Desktop or SUSE Enterprise OS, a Linux-based GNU operating system. How about Mandriva Desktop OS or Mandriva Enterprise OS?

Interestingly, Xandros already does this sort of thing. Its consumer Linux-based distribution is called the Xandros Desktop OS. The business version is called Xandros Business Desktop OS

One thing this sort of naming schema could do is to remove Linux trademark issues from the naming and branding of many Linux-based products. Linux-Based Product Branding and Identity

This naming thing is more than an exercise in nomenclature and taxonomy. For several months now, we have been comparing and reviewing five important Linux-based GNU operating system distributions, Fedora, Mandriva, Novell, SUSE, and Xandros. So far, we have published two articles based on these comparisons and reviews. And if you have read those two articles, you have seen there are lots of differences among the discussed Linux-based OS distributions.

(In Pursuit of Good Desktop Linux: Part 1, Network Neighborhood and MS Windows Partitions, and Part 2, Ease of Use and Ease of Migration Overview -- KDE, GNOME, and MS Windows Desktops)

All these Linux-based distributions have their own personalities. Simply calling these different Linux-based products Debian Linux, Fedora Linux, Mandriva Linux, Novell Linux, SUSE Linux, and so forth does not do justice to the individual characteristics and personalities of each of these Linux-based products. To the uninitiated, they sound too much like the same product with merely a different brand label on them

Interestingly, this is not all that new an idea. The original Caldera (now SCO) Linux product that was introduced in 1994 was Caldera Network Desktop -- not Caldera Linux or Caldera OpenLinux. In its Network Desktop product, Caldera had built a multi-user, network-ready, desktop, GNU-based operating system built around the Linux kernel. And that is just what the Caldera people called it ten years ago, Caldera Network Desktop. Please see the Caldera Note in the right sidebar.

Of course it is up to the distributors of Linux-based products to select and to promote the names for their products. And hopefully they will do that using the guidelines suggested here. However, in the meantime we will start using the guidelines suggested here as much as we can when referring to Linux-based products.

Why People Call It All Linux

On the other hand, in our e-mail discussion of the issues in this article with Jon "maddog" Hall, he presented a different point of view and made some very good points:

Jon "maddog" Hall: . . . as a marketing person, I understand that people like to use the name they like to use, whether it is correct or not. "Linux" rolls off the tongue. It is cute, people know who stands behind it, and it is what they got used to seeing. People have invested money, time, effort and "ownership" in having "Linux" in their name, and we understand and appreciate that. Linus [Torvalds] would like people to use the term "Linux" for any legitimate purpose.

Jon "maddog" Hall: Also as a marketing person, I see the danger of having the recognizable name too fragmented. As a "Unix(R)" person for a long time, I watched while "SunOS" and "Solaris" (Sun Microsystems), "Ultrix", "Digital Unix", "Tru64" (Digital Equipment Corporation), "HP/UX" (HP), "AIX" (IBM), "Xinux" and "SCO Unix" (SCO), and a variety of other deviations divided up and confused the market. All of them were "Unix" (more or less), but only two bore the name.

So when people read about "Unix" systems, there was this amazingly complex set of names that have very little to do with each other, even though the underlying system was much (if not almost exactly) the same. . . . (All registered trademarks are the property of their respective owners.)

Jon "maddog" Hall: I like the term "Linux", and I like cute penguins, and I hope that everyone continues to use them.

Jon "maddog" Hall: Richard [Stallman] calls it "GNU/Linux". Linus calls it "Linux". I call it "Linux" . . . it is what I (and a lot of other people) have always called it. But in my talks and presentations I make sure to give lots of credit to lots of people who have contributed free software.

Wrap-Up

Initially in this article, we sought to address the problems with all the very confusing Linux nomenclature. How do you know when someone says Linux if they are talking about:

* the kernel, * the operating system, * the desktop, * a distribution, * or whatever?

It is time to be more careful about how we use the term Linux. Time to make it clear when one is referring to the Linux kernel, the GNU/Linux operating system, a Linux-based desktop, a Linux-based distribution, or whatever.

To do that, we suggest in today's article that:

* Linux, when used by itself, be used to refer to the Linux kernel,

* when the term Linux is used in conjunction with Linux-based OSs, Linux-based distributions, or whatever, then they should be called Linux-based, such as SUSE OS, a Linux-based operating system, or The Mandriva Linux-based OS -- rather than Mandriva Linux or SUSE Linux,

* when a product is built on top of the Linux-based, GNU operating system, then the identifying phrase, Linux-based, GNU operating system, should be included in the name of the product -- such as SUSE OS, a Linux-based GNU operating system, or The Mandriva Linux-based GNU OS.

In part in this story we also are trying to come up with some nomenclature schema:

(a) where the right people and groups get the right credit for their efforts in developing, maintaining, and promoting all that which popularly is called Linux,

(b) where different Linux-based, GNU OS distros have more of an identity of their own, and

(c) where yet everything stays together as a unified Linux community.

After discussing the issues with Jon "maddog" Hall and Richard Stallman (rms), we are not sure if that is what the story actually does. But at least it might stimulate some good discussion of the issue(s). And it might help to clarify some confusions about the anatomy, construction, and components of modern-day Linux-based, GNU OS distributions.

It's difficult to address Linux nomenclature without getting into the fray of whether the operating system built around the Linux kernel should be called the GNU/Linux OS or simply Linux. We tried to keep the GNU/Linux OS verses Linux OS issues to a minimum here in order to try to maintain focus on the issues this story is meant to address, being more careful about how we use the term Linux.

However, if we did not lose focus in this article, we came close to losing focus due to the GNU/Linux OS verses Linux OS controversy. Additionally, we likely will get flamed by both camps in the GNU/Linux OS verses Linux OS controversy. But if that happens it might mean that this article is right-about where it ought to be.

What are your thoughts about these Linux-based product naming guidelines and issues. Please feel free to let us know your thoughts about them by sending an e-mail to us at LinuxNaming_AT_mozillaquest.com. Please replace the "_AT_ " with the "@" character. Unless you note otherwise, we will feel free to publish all or part of the e-mail that you send to us.

[N3WBI3]

OSS PING

If you are interested in the OSS ping list please mail me

[N3WBI3]

I disagree with the convention they present its a decent red for people who wonder what Linux is. I use Linux usually to refer to the OS, but sometimes the kernel if the context is not clear I will try to be as specific as I can but I am not going to waste key strokes on something a moderately intelligent person should grasp.

[clyde asbury]

GNU/Linux bump.

[Salo]

I generally refer to linux as a distro. BTW, did you know that Red Hat and Red Flag are the same thing and that Linus Torvald's father is a moscow-trained communist?

[clyde asbury]

Calling distributions Linux-based rather than, for example, Mandriva Linux is wise. Otherwise, it's difficult to know at what point Mandriva and Debian become distinct.

As the article notes, Xandros does this already, e.g. Xandros Desktop OS. For the average user, this is much clearer than Xandros Linux. "Which one" is probably a question potential Linux users never get beyond - so they stay with what they are already using.

[softwarecreator]

I generally refer to linux as a distro. BTW, did you know that Red Hat and Red Flag are the same thing and that Linus Torvald's father is a moscow-trained communist?

Commies, all of 'em!!  =)

[clyde asbury]

Commies, all of 'em!! =)

Let's see if you laugh when the Chicom missiles guided by open source code start raining on your town.

But you say open source is inferior software. We should be glad our enemies use it, if that's true.

You know nothing, and I know everything. Can't you see .. [ad nauseam].

[chronic_loser]

I am an idiot. Kick me. Please. I will come back for the abuse because I love it so.

[softwarecreator]

Let's see if you laugh when the Chicom missiles guided by open source code start raining on your town.

First of all, it was a joke that several people who visit these threads regularly understand ... it's been quite a debate for a while.

Second, if missiles come raining down in my area, I would assume my last concern would be if it was powered by OSS or MS or Solaris or Unix or ....

[clyde asbury]

Joking - all apologies.

I should have added a :)

[chronic_loser]

I think he is in on the joke, too. It is kind of like drawing the pentagram, lighting the candles, and muttering the incantations. Calling the evil spirits, if you will. Except that instead of a dread lord of darkness showing up it is kind of like Charlie Chaplin wearing a goat head.

You can't help but laugh.

[clyde asbury]

I really enjoy N3WBI3's and ShadowAce's threads. The tension has been so high on them for a while it's good to be able to joke.

Both N3WBI3 and ShadowAce are to be applauded IMO.

[softwarecreator]

instead of a dread lord of darkness showing up it is kind of like Charlie Chaplin wearing a goat head.

LOL!!!  Great image!!

[softwarecreator]

true ... also gotta give some respect to GE, he was getting slammed on all ends and still kept up.  Whether you agree with him or not ... he did stay the course and made some very good points.  Sure, ocassionally drifting off that course, but not too bad ... all things considered.

[softwarecreator]

Joking - all apologies.
I should have added a :)

no apologies needed ...

Heck of a thread, huh?  =)

[clyde asbury]

Heck of a thread, huh? =)

It's entertaining so far. :)

[Salo]

I always think of Dark Helmet - or the Simpsons Comic Book Guy.

Charlie Chaplin wearing a goat head

[Salo]

No, you don't. The Penguin Ping was started by rdb3. Iggle's act was old years ago, and if you were around to listen to him claim on and on he was Christ's messenger about the evils of linux, you realize how pathetic he is. They say patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, and unfortunately, Iggle is a living demonstration of that.

also gotta give some respect to GE, he was getting slammed on all ends and still kept up.

[softwarecreator]

Iggle's act was old years ago, and if you were around to listen to him claim on and on he was Christ's messenger about the evils of linux, you realize how pathetic he is.

Didn't know anything about that, being a newbie and all.  If true, I have to admit that it would be a bit creepy to witness, but since I wasn't around for it, I can only judge by what I see now.  I guess you guys do have a long history here on this forum, which would explain some of the animosity toward each other on certain subjects.

I hate joining the party late.