Ok. I have one question then. I think we can come to a clear resolution with it.
Debian GNU/kFreeBSD, what percentage is it Linux?
It includes 100% the apps, system tools, GUIs, and libraries that you associate with Linux. It also has 0 lines of Linux code in it.
If you can justify that it is above >0% Linux I will use your definition of operating system going forward.
But we can agree that there are upper and lower limits though. And I believe that we can now agree that system utilities and system libraries are outside of that limit. Just because the edge are fuzzy, don’t mean we can’t come to any conclusions at all.
Any now stepping way way back. I think we can now agree that Fedora, Ubuntu and other distros run the same operating system. That operating system being Linux.
That’s ok! I was just trying to help you see the difference. You do now. It’s a win/win. There was a reason why I kept on brining up Debian GNU/kFreeBSD. It really highlights the difference.
You’re gunna do you and use your own definitions and I respect that. But the first line from the page is
Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is a port that consists of GNU userland using the GNU C library on top of FreeBSD’s kernel, coupled with the regular Debian package set.
It is literally GNU userland using the GNU C library on top of FreeBSD’s kernel, coupled with the regular Debian package set
You can say Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is BSD system tools with a Linux kernel but you would be evidently and clearly wrong.
Anyways. I wish you well. Best of luck.
If you define it that way you are right. Yah. But the common understanding is a bit different than yours.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system
Really great read.
I urge you to take a look at https://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/ It’s the exact same utilities and everything but a completely different kernel. It really highlights the difference here. How would your definition account for this?
Would Debian GNU/kFreeBSD be 50% Linux, 50% FreeBSD under your definition even though it has no Linux code? It has all the system libraries and system utilities that you associate with Linux.
But it literally is the same. The only difference is the user space. Debian GNU/kFreeBSD shows this. Different operating system same user space.
Take a look at Wikipedia for more info.
An operating system (OS) is system software that manages computer hardware and software resources, and provides common services for computer programs. Time-sharing operating systems schedule tasks for efficient use of the system and may also include accounting software for cost allocation of processor time, mass storage, peripherals, and other resources.
I mean they are all literally the same operating system yah! They all use the same kernel APIs.
The logical conclusion is that from an operating system they are all basicly the same.
The main difference is the user space. The package management and defaults.
Look at Debian GNU/kFreeBSD it’s a whole different operating system with the Debian user space. It’s cool stuff and really highlights the difference between operating system and user space.
Hot take. Under semantic versioning everything after vista has been in essence a new version of vista.
Going from NT 5.x to 6.x was a major jump.
The reason why Vista had no/terrible drivers was because they went from an insecure one driver bug crashed the whole system model to more secure isolated drivers that don’t crash the whole system model. Developers had to learn how to write new drivers and none of the XP drivers worked.
They went from a single user OS with a multi user skin on top, to a full role based access control user system.
They went from global admin/non-admin permissions to scoped UAC permissions for apps.
Remember on Vista when apps constantly had that “asking for permissions” popup? That was the apps not using the 6.x UAC APIs.
Given the underlying architectural situation everything since Vista has been vista with polish added (or removed depending on how you look at it)
Things will go beyond vista when a new major release with new mandatory APIs shows up.
I don’t think overprovisioning is a thing that is realistically is a problem in the U.S. or in Germany. I know that modern homes tend to have 300amp mains. Older homes 100amps. You would have to have a house that was wired in 1920 in order to have a 20amp mains available. In that case you have bigger issues safety wise.
Ohh! I spent some time in the U.S. and there are 230v mains available. They just have special plugs. All homes have 230v. It’s just not available through the shocked face plug.
The way that it works in most countries is that the breakers are per circuit in your wall. The breakers trip in order to prevent that single circuit from overheating and starting a fire in your walls.
Let’s say you have a wire that’s rated for 16amps. More than that and it becomes a fire risk just threw overheating. @230v that gives you 3680w per circuit.
If you have your industrial microwave, water heater, and car charger all going at the same time on that same circuit. This will draw way more than 3680w and thus would go over that 16a limit.
The breakers trips once you go over that 16a limit for safety. It’s a good thing. This all being said no sane electrician would put those three things on the same circuit. lol.
Circuit breakers are actually what enable you to safely over provision. Without them fires would just be a matter of time.
I know it works this way in the U.S. and Germany at least.
Exactly.
No problem. I just thought I had covered that when I said:
That’s some incredible stuff. Now days you can use things like XCP-ng to do the same but VMware was ahead of the pack for a decade.
They started dying when they were squeezed between cloud hyper scalars and the cheaper alternative hypervisors that finally had caught up.
This being said I don’t think even in 2025 proxmox and things like vsphere are comparable. XCP-ng I do think is though. It’s open source and matches features.
You’re not wrong in 2025. But VMware was able do it in 2003.
There is a major difference between running a vm on your desktop and orchestrating a fleet of highly available virtual machines. Just one example might be vmotion. You can move a virtual machine from one physical host to another in real time with 0 interruption to services running on that host.
That’s some incredible stuff. Now days you can use things like XCP-ng to do the same but VMware was ahead of the pack for a decade.
They started dying when they were squeezed between cloud hyper scalars and the cheaper alternative hypervisors that finally had caught up.
Then the corpse was bought by Broadcom who is currently trying to milk it before the body completely rots.
I mean if you use the Marxist/Leninist definition of left then obviously not. But I mean left leaning in terms of the societal understanding.
But the fact that the majority (or perhaps less than half now) of the responses literally prove the point I am trying to make proves my point downvotes or not.
You have to remember the people who would literally unironically make such a post that proves my post are the densest of the dense.
Most sexists, while dense, are less dense than a black hole and would not prove my point for me under such a post.
You are extremely dense. It is 100% you in that picture because that is the way your bumbling, rambling posts read like.
Alas I have been shown to be wrong! If not for my womanly ways I would have been the wiser!
The point is, that the answer is 0% by any reasonable metric. I don’t think any more is to be gained here given the question dodge.
So I will say good bye and best of luck again.