Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #244027
| From | Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? |
| Followup-To | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Date | 2014-05-16 18:46 +0100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <ll5it9$6id$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <lkhhhh$55v$1@dont-email.me> <lkio76$8pp$1@dont-email.me> <lkipd4$hha$1@dont-email.me> <ll4qi2$qgd$1@dont-email.me> <ll5ga9$ha2$7@dont-email.me> |
Followups directed to: comp.os.linux.advocacy
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 DFS wrote: > Lusotec wrote: >> I'm not a "IT Sooperman" but I at least know a bit of what I'm talking >> about. But you and Lloyd don't have to believe me or anyone else. You can >> simply look at the kernels and see for yourselves. Like I'm doing bellow. >> >> Select a Android kernel version and compare it to the equivalent main >> tree Linux version. Then select two consecutive main tree Linux versions >> and compare those. Then compare the comparisons and see if you consider >> the Android Linux version a heavily modified version of the main tree >> Linux version. >> >> For the Android Linux to main tree Linux I selected the oldest Android >> kernel, 2.6.39, that was release before anything from the Android project >> was committed to the main tree Linux. I'm assuming this version has the >> largest difference to the main tree Linux but you can prove me wrong by >> making the comparison for other version(s). I selected the most recent >> two consecutive version of main tree Linux, 3.13 and 3.14. >> >> Here are the links for the versions I used, with the corresponding dates. >> >> https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/common/+archive/android-2.6.39.tar.gz >> (Mon Sep 10 12:57:30 2012 -0700) >> https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/linux-2.6.39.tar.xz >> (19-May-2011 04:21) >> https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/linux-3.13.tar.xz >> (20-Jan-2014 02:59) >> https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/linux-3.14.tar.xz >> (14-Apr-2014 18:44) >> >> I extract these tar ball and run the following commands to make the >> comparisons. >> >> $ diff --minimal --recursive --ignore-all-space --unified linux-2.6.39 \ >> linux-android-2.6.39 | diffstat | tail -n1 >> 579 files changed, 6850 insertions(+), 1988 deletions(-) >> >> $ diff --minimal --recursive --ignore-all-space --unified linux-3.13 \ >> linux-3.14 | diffstat | tail -n1 >> 9074 files changed, 229934 insertions(+), 157688 deletions(-) >> >> For curiosity, lets remove the drivers tree and see what that changes. >> >> $ rm -Rf linux-2.6.39/drivers linux-android-2.6.39/drivers \ >> linux-3.13/drivers linux-3.14/drivers >> >> $ diff --minimal --recursive --ignore-all-space --unified linux-2.6.39 \ >> linux-android-2.6.39 | diffstat | tail -n1 >> 326 files changed, 3927 insertions(+), 1128 deletions(-) >> >> $ diff --minimal --recursive --ignore-all-space --unified linux-3.13 \ >> linux-3.14 | diffstat | tail -n1 >> 4546 files changed, 107554 insertions(+), 69067 deletions(-) >> >> Excluding the drivers, the number are almost halved but the general >> picture stays mostly the same. >> >> - From the above numbers it is easy to see that the differences for >> Android Linux 2.6.39 to main tree Linux 2.6.39 is many times smaller than >> the differences for two consecutive main tree Linux versions, 3.13 and >> 3.14. >> >> If the differences of two consecutive main tree Linux versions (3 months >> apart) is many times larger than the differences of a Android version to >> main tree Linux version then I don't see how the Android Linux version >> can be "heavily modified", unless one considers two consecutive version >> of Linux to be "heavily modified" times 30! > > > Nice analysis. Wish more cola people made the effort to back up their > blithering (not that you blithered). > > Unfortunately, it's misleading. A count of the number of changes gives > no indication about the relative size and difficulty of those changes. The number of changes gives a exact, objective and direct indication of the relative size of those changes. The difficulty of those changes is another matter that is not in debate. What is being debated is the amount of modifications, or to be precise if "heavily modified" is an appropriate description of Android Linux kernel in relation to the main tree Linux. For that, the numbers above are all that is needed. > And you can't change the statements by Torvalds and Hartman, who know > much more about the effort than you; 'massive chore' and 'lot of merger > to be done' and 'eventually...four or five years away' is good enough > for me. The statements of Torvalds and Hartman refer to the amount of work involved and give no indication of the amount of those modifications. > It's beside the main point, anyway, which is that the modified kernel, > Apache-licensed, Android Linux (the kernel) is still GPL licensed. > corporate-developed and heavily marketed Android OS bears no resemblance > to a traditional mainline kernel, GPL-licensed, community-developed and > unmarketed Linux distro. Most of Android is Apache licensed, but again, licensing was not the matter being debated. > People ignore Linux on the desktop, and they didn't choose Android on > their smartphone (or tablets) because of the modified Linux kernel. People don't choose the kernel and OS on their devices. Most people don't know what a kernel or OS are. > In fact, Google and even Ubuntu barely mention the word Linux on their > websites (which is a bit of an insult). That is not true. <https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=comp.os.linux.advocacy/ FpiY18K4OO4/u32B_lw0RWEJ> > Calling Android "Linux" is a big fat lie, but it's what advocates hang > their hats on. Android uses Linux so there is no lie, fat or thin! Regards -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlN2TugACgkQGQjO2ccW76pP6QD9GD1irg9VTxvhAJ8EqGhpASw1 30oQsYEd7VlNauzfv9gA/RIH5jGiHYF7aiijHnSuxxm8JXf0PuPIHeGtciIgryad =77wG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-08 16:18 +0000
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-08 18:44 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-08 11:41 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-08 11:45 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-08 19:33 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-08 11:47 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-08 14:44 -0500
Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-08 16:42 -0400
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-08 22:45 +0200
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-08 13:49 -0700
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-08 13:46 -0700
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 02:26 +0000
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2014-05-09 02:38 +0000
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-09 05:52 -0400
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-09 07:37 -0400
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-09 06:56 -0500
Re: Windows, the OS that hides that it is VMS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-08 19:39 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-05-08 23:25 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-08 23:20 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-08 19:53 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-09 07:34 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 09:18 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 02:39 +0000
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-08 19:50 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-08 14:46 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 02:21 +0000
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 02:24 +0000
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-08 23:20 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 10:35 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2014-05-09 11:08 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 09:38 +0000
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-09 06:51 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 14:19 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 08:59 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 13:34 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 08:58 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-09 08:03 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-09 08:45 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 10:09 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-09 06:49 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 13:52 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 09:30 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 15:33 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-09 07:55 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-05-09 08:17 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 10:51 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-09 07:24 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2014-05-09 13:33 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-09 10:06 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lloyd E Parsons <lloydp21@live.com> - 2014-05-09 09:21 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-09 09:46 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 09:28 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-09 09:09 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-09 15:20 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-09 10:40 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-16 11:50 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-16 11:52 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-16 12:59 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-16 07:31 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-16 06:46 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-16 12:59 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-16 18:15 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-16 12:39 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-16 16:44 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-16 13:01 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Lusotec <nomail@nomail.not> - 2014-05-16 18:46 +0100
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-16 13:10 -0500
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-05-16 16:46 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-05-16 16:53 -0400
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2014-05-09 04:38 -0700
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 13:40 +0200
Re: An Android All-In-One @ #9 in Desktops? Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-05-09 09:51 -0400
csiph-web