76

The GNU project was created to produce a free software alternative to Unix. They were able to produce most of the programs an operating system would provide, but their kernel, the GNU Hurd, was not stable enough to rely upon. Linux is a kernel, the most base level of an operating system, and was created and published under the GNU GPL, a free license. It ...


23

Linux vs. GNU/Linux Terminology and History-in-Brief In common usage, the terms Linux and GNU/Linux IPA: /ɡəˈnuː slæʃ ˈlɪnəks/ † [though often said sans 'slash', the FSF recommendation is to pronounce it] refer to the same thing: the software distribution running on a computer that includes Linux, the operating-system kernel, consisting of low-level ...


18

but that is [in] my opinion not in accordance with the GPL licences I agree with you. The GPL has always been pretty clear that you need to supply source if you're propagating binaries, and various authorities have opined that pointing to someone else's repository is not sufficient, eg companies who redistribute software packaged for them by an upstream ...


16

It's to distinguish GNU/Linux from other operating environments built on Linux. Each of the following environments combines Linux proper, which is a kernel, with a different "userland", or set of userspace programs and libraries. In rough order of appearance: GNU/Linux is a fairly complete clone of the functionality of the UNIX system. Desktop and server ...


15

For Debian you can proceed as follows: Post an Intent to Package (ITP) bug report to the Debian Bug Tracking system (https://www.debian.org/Bugs/). Or if an existing RFP (Request for Packaging) bug report for the software already exists, you can assign it to yourself. Create the packaging for the software. Upload the software and the packaging to ...


11

Remember that just Linux - the kernel - is not very useful. In order to use it, you need some programs. At the very least a shell, its utilities, an editor, and probably a compiler so you can write more programs. Many of these were already written seperately by the GNU project, or available as BSD-licensed code. So a minimal Linux system already includes ...


10

@FaheemMitha already gave a perfect answer for Debian, but I wanted to add the process for Ubuntu. If a package is included in Debian, it will automatically be included in Ubuntu shortly down the road: Ubuntu regularly incorporates source packages from Debian, so it is encouraged to upload a package to Debian first to automatically have it in Ubuntu in ...


10

The business of RedHat and other linux companies usually lies in selling service, training and convenience around it. While the software itself is open source (at least most of it), they do sell the service to provide expedite security fixes. In particular they offer you the guarantee that you can run the product for at least a decade on the same software ...


8

Distributions are older than Linux! Ever heard of BSD? The acronym stands for Berkeley Software Distribution. The original Berkeley Software Distribution was a collection of software developed at the University of California at Berkeley, which you could install on a Version 6 Unix system. The year was 1978. At the time, access to software sources was still ...


8

First of all, you may want to discuss GPL compliance with your company's legal counsel and develop a clear strategy for dealing with GPL code. Complying with the GPL is not necessarily difficult, but it can place surprising obligations on you. The intention of the GPL is effectively an end user protection effort, so that end users of the GPL-covered ...


7

With regards to Which distributions were the first and when did these projects start? This is discussed at the beginning of Glyn Moody's book "Rebel Code", in Chapter 6, "Boot Then Root". He mentions the distribution from MCC (the Manchester Computing Center) as being a very early example, though perhaps not the first. However, the book does not mention ...


7

They are different terms for the same thing, used by two different groups of people. Use of the GNU/Linux name is done at the explicit request of Richard Stallman and the GNU Project. You can read the full rationale on the GNU Project's website, but it seems to boil down to this: Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the ...


6

Actually, let me give you my Paypal account. I am the sole receiver for Linux license payments for Europe.... Just kidding. More seriously, while you can buy support subscriptions for Linux from Ubuntu or RedHat, you can typically download and use freely these distros (at least Ubuntu, Fedora, CentOS and OpenSuse) as well as Debian which is the hallmark of ...


5

These kinds of notices are broadly addressed in the GPL FAQ entry about export restrictions: Some distributors of GPLed software require me in their umbrella EULAs or as part of their downloading process to “represent and warrant” that I am located in the US or that I intend to distribute the software in compliance with relevant export control laws. Why ...


5

Building a distribution is a lot of work. Perhaps instead of trying to create a full distribution it is better to just maintain the package(s) for Debian or Ubuntu, or offering to help out if it is already being done. In any case, search for other interested parties, having colleagues gives people with whom to discuss issues or which can take over the work ...


5

You are re-distributing an entire Debian build with your software (licence unspecified) aggregated inside it. If I run a cron job to update the vm from time to time am I correct that I would have to provide the source code of the updated gpl programs as well ? You are. We have a question on re-distributing unmodified GPLv2 binaries (they are unmodified ...


5

A bug report with the upstream maintainers is not likely to be accepted. It is not a bug in their build scripts that you force-define a macro that a new version of the compiler also defines, especially as it is a macro with a leading underscore, which are reserved for use by implementers of C and C++. If it is a Gentoo policy to remove all uses of the -...


4

There are two factors at play that make Linux teem with distributions, both loosely related to being open source: it's freely redistributable, and it has a bazaar development model. Making a software distribution requires having the permission to distribute the software. When the software is freely redistributable, the distributor doesn't need to seek ...


4

The GPL does allow you to distribute modified binaries, but only as long as you also offer the source code. For the GPLv2, this is discussed in section 3: Either you distribute the binary together with the complete source code, or you distribute the binary together with a written offer for the complete source code. The relationship between GPLv2 licensed ...


4

Every program is "independent" (or it communicate with other programs with standard methods). So it is considered a mere aggregation, and the license of one piece is independent of the license of the other piece. Debian solved the problem creating the *Debian Free Software Guidelines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_Free_Software_Guidelines , which ...


3

So, let's break down the possibilities here. Elastix owns some of its own code. It gives you permission to use it under the GPL, but it isn't bound by the GPL itself, because it owns the code. It can do whatever the hell it wants with that code. It can license it to you under the GPL, and sell it to me under a proprietary license, and then stop offering it ...


3

1) Who did you buy a support contract from? 2) If they are using GPL software (ie, the Linux kernel) then they must give you the source if you ask for it, and there should be an offer made for it in your documentation, etc. HOWEVER... they may be using binary blobs to keep some things proprietary.... 3) This is Linus' policy for submissions made to the ...


3

Am I allowed to do that? I'm concerned over the openjdk:8-jdk Docker container which includes a Debian GNU/Linux 9 image which uses a GPL license. Yes you are allowed to do that alright. Assuming you are redistributing the Docker image(s) you are also responsible to comply with the licensing conditions of every FOSS package included in the images (including ...


3

Linux distributions use package management tools to handle what you describe. It is very difficult to manage the legal hurdles involved in packaging and redistributing software that is not free, or is not allowed to be redistributed under broad terms. No one can put Microsoft Office in a package manager except Microsoft, because Microsoft won't give anyone a ...


2

A large distribution like Debian has tens of thousands of packages, from thousands of original development teams. Distributions take care of most of the hassle involved in downloading the source files and compiling them for you - rather than everyone figuring it out themselves you can rely on the cooperative work of the community. Some things that ...


2

I often read that some distributions contain non-free components while some other are free. As an end-user, I don't understand very well the difference between free and non-free distributions. The main difference is that with a distribution that only contains free components, you get access to all source code and the right to make improvements/changes ...


2

Your question reads at first like an advertising... That said: 1) Which party hold the responsibility to support/resolve the bugs of Linux kernel when EOS is in production? If this is a vanilla kernel, you can submit bug report to the LKML for sure. NONE has a responsibility to do fix your bugs. Someone may help. This is a gift, not an obligation. If ...


2

Taking some examples from GPLv3 (which clarified something that were considered ambiguous in previous versions): A compilation of a covered word with other separate and independent works, which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work, and which are not combined with it such as to form a larger program, in or on a volume of a storage ...


2

It's easiest to understand by looking at other libc/kernel pairs. For example, I know that there are people who run: gnu/linux musl/linux gnu/kfreebsd


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible