Template talk:Linux/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Not useful

This template barely links to one tenth of the Linux related subjects, and half the ones it links to doesn't even display the template. I think we should stick to the many categories about Linux that we're already using. Elfguy 23:46, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

sofixit. Alphax τεχ 16:50, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Just re-did it

With a nifty little navbar to boot, too. Feel free to go nuts with it. --Toussaint 17:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

This seems to have increased template clutter and it looks pretty bad on Linux. I suggest dropping this infobox-style layout and turning this back into a standard navigation box. Prolog 19:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Optional logo?

Is this being used? We should probably just hard-code a Tux in here or something. Chris Cunningham 13:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

new tux

what is wrong with the new tux?--Tuxthepenguin933 (talk) 23:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Devices

Added "Devices" to the Applications. As Devices and Embedded are pretty close, I will suggest merging those two articles into one.--Kozuch (talk) 00:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Legal bodies

What about adding kind of section that will reflect the actuall "real" (business/nonprofit) world Linux support? I know the name "Legal bodies" might not be perfect, but there is nothing better comming on my mind now.

Candidates to include:

--Kozuch (talk) 08:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Added Linux Foundation as its role is quite clear.--Kozuch (talk) 17:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Reordering contents in the new template

I just made some minor changes to the new template (History > General, abc in Applications). I think there is more revamp needed - order it all a little bit (move something from General to Others, maybe create "Lists" section etc.)--Kozuch (talk) 13:29, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

You are probably quite right. Give me a few more minutes to implement it across the pages as described above and then feel free to edit away! I will drop a note on this page when I think I am done - shouldn't be long! - Ahunt (talk) 13:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm probably going to open up a whole can of worms here - but surely "Linux kernel" and "Linus Torvalds" should come before "GNU Project" and "Richard Stallman" (in their respective categories)? The GNU Project is obviously part of Linux-related history (which is part of the Linux kernel bit at present), so, in my opinion, shouldn't precede it. ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
I put them in alphabetical order by displayed name in the template (as opposed to the article name it links to), except for the two people's names, which are alphabetical by last name. That's just me, however, there is no rule that says that these templates need to be in alphabetical order - they could be better in some sort of logical order instead or order of (someone's) ranking of importance. I am going to leave the template alone now, so do jump in and see if you can make it better - I just ask for you to leave some sort of rationale in your edit summary to avoid confusion!! - Ahunt (talk) 14:11, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, if everything is ordered alphabetically (albeit by surname for Linus and Richard) then I guess that's fair enough. I always try to leave something useful in my edit summary so as not to confuse others. ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:21, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Let's just go with alphabetical for everything, seriously. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Template's future - content and name

I am probably about to fire off a great debate, but I am starting to think that either the template should be renamed to "Free software" or "Free software" template should be newly created. Actually, the really correct name would be "Free and Open Source Software" while this term is being generally used by experts. Then, debates whether "GNU" and "Richard Stallman" should be in this template would be simply over.

Renaming to FOSS would be the best I thing as it is more general term and actually contains "Linux" and "Open source software". For both Free software and Open source software article I have proposed to clearly state the difference between these two in both articles with optional merge in one article. There has been some edits to Free software since, but the issue remains I think. More background info is here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kozuch (talk • contribs) 15:10, 23 March 2008

An interesting issue. I think that there definitely needs to be a "Free and Open Source Software" navigation template, but that there also needs to be a Linux template, too. I work a lot on aviation articles and there seems to be no problem in that area of Wikipedia with pages having multiple nav templates. See Beechcraft Model 18 for an example.
I would suggest that we create a new "Free and Open Source Software" template and leave this Linux template to grow over time on strictly Linux topics. If we can get some consensus that this is the way to proceed then I would be willing to start by constructing a Free and Open Source Software nav template, although I would need lots of help filling it out and completing the topics that should be included - Ahunt (talk) 15:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Taking the request above to heart, I have started work on a Free and Open Source Software nav template. I would emphasize that this is just a basic start - it is no where near finished! I would appreciate it if other editors watching this page would have a look and edit the proposed template at User:Ahunt/Sandbox and let's see if we can create something worth going "live" with or not! - Ahunt (talk) 13:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I think also that it is probably the best to have both Linux and FOSS templates, as I like to see topics nicely distinguished when possible. Seeing the proposal, I think it can go "live" right away... there are many more worse already "live" templates than this! FOSS template should have been here ages ago already to tie the scattered FOSS content little bit together :).--Kozuch (talk) 15:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the encouragement and for your edits on the proposed template. I don't have a problem having it go live right away - that will give more editors a change to have a kick at it. I have some doubts about the idea of listing applications listed on it, as there are tens of thousands of them. But let's go live and and see how it evolves. Perhaps you can help me spread it around on the pages it should go onto? - Ahunt (talk) 17:08, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
For anyone watching this page, the new template is at Template:FLOSS. Please feel free to edit it and spread it to article pages! - Ahunt (talk) 17:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

This box

I'd just like to suggest this box be changed from a giant column in the top of articles, to a bar at the bottom, similar to the template for Unix-like operating systems, and the OpenBSD template. The way it is now looks rather intrusive. 74.13.52.11 (talk) 21:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I think that is an excellent idea! Many articles on Wikipedia use article-bottom, collapsible nav boxes and they are much more flexible, expandable and less obtrusive than the side-bar type of box. For an example of many (maybe too many) have a look at the bottom of the article Beechcraft Model 18. There are ten different ones there with a huge amount of information, but the point is that they don't take up much room and being at the bottom of the article are unobtrusive to the casual reader. Incidentally if an article has just one box then the box stays "open". If there are more than one they are default "closed", to reduce space.
However, rather than just endorse the idea and let someone else do the work I have made a sandbox version of what the current box in this format would look like, for everyone's consideration. You can find it at User:Ahunt/Sandbox.
I would appreciate it if editors interested in this template page could have a look and see what they think. Comments, critiques and edits of that page are welcome. Please post your comments here, rather than on my sandbox talk page, just to keep the discussion in one place where others will find it.
Incidentally in this new proposed format there would be lots of room for a "people" section similar to the OpenBSD template - Ahunt (talk) 13:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Looks neat. Using the greens from the current template (#aaddbb and #ccffcc) may improve it further, as should removing the colons from the groupnames (unnecessary), sticking to a single font-size (I've just amended that in the current template) and using the more discreet version of the dividers alongside improved linewrap handling (i.e. {{nowrap begin}} item{{·w}} item{{·w}} ... {{nowrap end}}). Alternatively, what if the current infobox-style template were thinner? Sardanaphalus (talk) 15:20, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the input and for disabling the categories - probably a good idea in the sandbox. I based this proposed box on the Template:OpenBSD, so it started with most of that one's features. I have made some of the changes you have suggested: removing the category colons and removing the text sizing (the template seems to automatically make bracketed text smaller). The rest of the features you mentioned are standard for this type of navigation box, including the blue colour. I haven't come across a nav box of this type that isn't blue, but perhaps I haven't looked far enough afield. See: Template:GNU, Template:OpenBSD, Template:History of Windows, Template:Mac_OS or Template:Sun_Microsystems for some examples from the software world. I have added in the image of Tux, since GNU has an image on that template and also a couple of "people" in a new category to show how that would look in the proposed User:Ahunt/Sandbox. - Ahunt (talk) 16:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Are there any rules of style in the various random rules most people would rather never read? I've never read any of them, so I wouldn't know. While I don't much care for green, I don't think I've ever encountered anything saying those must be blue. I know the infoxes, like the infobox software, os, and biography all that jazz, have a colour for each catagory they are in. 74.13.41.127 (talk) 18:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Good question - the rundown on the nav box template is at Template:Navbox. As described is possible to change the colours by applying styles. However it says "It is not recommended that one modifies the default styles but it is possible if one wishes to do so." and "Styles are generally not recommended as to maintain consistency among templates and pages in Wikipedia. However, the option to modify styles is given." - Ahunt (talk) 19:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

At this point we haven't come to a consensus either way to keep the current template or to move to one more like the proposed template. I have also invited anyone to edit the proposed template, if they want to try new colours or other features. I would like to hear from other editors watching this page on this issue. Do we keep the current one, change to the new template or modify either the current or proposed template? - 11:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd be more than happy to make this a normal navbox. I don't like the "random sidebar" style of template for a number of reasons. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:12, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

In seeking a consensus one way or the other, after a week we have two in favour of moving to a more conventional nav box such as prototyped at User:Ahunt/Sandbox (me and Chris Cunningham (not at work)) and two with suggestions or questions but not opposed as far as I read (Sardanaphalus and 74.13.41.127). Is there anyone opposed to this proposal? - Ahunt (talk) 11:23, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

  • So long as they're not too wide, I don't think I have a problem with sidebar/infobox-style templates. Maybe it's time, however, to "be bold", make the change and see if that prompts any new comment..? Sardanaphalus (talk) 18:08, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
    PS I'd replace the dividers between items in your sandbox version with more discreet wrap-sensitive ones within some linewrap handling, i.e. use {{nowrap begin}} item{{·w}} item{{·w}} ... {{nowrap end}}.
Sardanaphalus - Thanks for your comment and encouragement on this proposal! I have edited the proposed template at User:Ahunt/Sandbox to incorporate the {{nowrap begin}} item{{·w}} item{{·w}} ... {{nowrap end}} as you have suggested. I hope that I did it right? It seems to look okay! Can I have you check it for me? - Ahunt (talk) 21:03, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Done. Only major misunderstanding seemed to be the {{·w}}s; for the spacing and linewrapping to work correctly, these need to be appended to items rather than prefixed (or spaced apart). Sardanaphalus (talk) 22:34, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for fixing that. I am very new at nav boxes, but at last I have a good example now! So I gather to post it on this template page it can be copied directly with just the <pre></pre> removed?
You may also want to have a look at Template:OpenBSD I used it as an example and it seems to need some fix-ups, based on your input here? - Ahunt (talk) 23:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Done. (I used <div>s as an alternative to line-height; see what you think.) Sardanaphalus (talk) 02:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay - since I have some time this morning I am going to go ahead and implement the new version of the template. The order of work will be:

  1. Copy code from sandbox to this template
  2. Follow "What links here" to fix template locations on all pages that use the template - mostly to move it from the top of the page to the bottom.
  3. Check all pages listed on the template to ensure they have the template installed - some don't right now as they aren't on the "What links here" list.
  4. Add in any other pages linked to the template that need to be added.

That should do it. I will drop a note here when the work is all done. It should take around an hour, hopefully. - Ahunt (talk) 12:58, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay I think that I have completed everything listed above. I have checked every page the template appears on and it seems to be working right, even collapsing when there is more than one template on the page.
I know that there is at least one editor all set to jump in and improve this further, so thank you for your patience and please "have at 'er" - Ahunt (talk) 13:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Rocking! Many thanks. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:53, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Chris: Glad you like the result!! This was only my second attempt at a template so it was a real learning experience. It seems to be working well so far. I am hoping that other editors will now use this new format box and expand it to include links to more Linux articles that would have over-volumed the old style box. Personally I am going to use it as an example for future templates. - Ahunt (talk) 13:58, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Does this template need...

...a {{documentation}} page? Sardanaphalus (talk) 01:55, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

It's good practice to always use them for templates. It keeps interlang and category links off the main template and means that the main template logic can be protected if it's high-profile without preventing people from updating them. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

andrew morton

I think andrew morton should be added. He is one of the lead kernel devs. jono Bacon is just a comminity manager for ubuntu. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.246.100 (talk) 14:06, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, then he can be added, but not by deleting other people who are already in the list. ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion: leave people out

The (maybe badly named) {{FOSS celeb}} template already contains the people who made GNU/Linux happen, so rather than expanding this template to also cover this topic, I think it would be best to leave the people in the people template. Gronky 19:20, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

+1 The list of people is highly subjective Moreati (talk) 23:01, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to +1 this, it really is begging for people to throw their own personal heros in without reference to their actual impact on the Free and Open
Source Software landscape. Purserj (talk) 23:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Just against it - certain individuals are infolved in Linux kernel which only this template is related to the most.--Kozuch (talk) 15:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree that it should stay - the lists are not the same and generally do not appear on the same pages. There is value as it is. - Ahunt (talk) 15:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

SOHO citations

Vector Linux design around SOHO. SOHO is usually a small scale buisness hosted at home enviroments in case if you guys don't know, its similar to Thin Client, except it has more functionality. I am thinking Home Networking should probably be added also. --Ramu50 (talk) 21:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

This link goes to Small office/home office which is an article about having an office in your home - there is no mention of Linux in it. Is this a mistaken link, or am I missing something here? The disambiguation page Soho (disambiguation) provides no clue as to anything with a connection to Linux either. Can you please shed some light on what you are trying to link to? - Ahunt (talk) 23:01, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Just more of Ramu50's contentious navbox inclusions. It's only tangentially related, and doesn't belong here. I've removed it again. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 00:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Because you could perhaps use Linux in your home office? Beats me! Thanks for removing it again! - Ahunt (talk) 00:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Do you even know what SOHO is. SOHO is classification of the size or type of business, therefore it must refer to small office / home business. The SOHO articles doesn’t need to provide any sources of Linux. Because that is NOT what the article is about. And FYI loser (Chris), in case you don’t know how to read the sources provided. The links clearly shows that they are Linux OS developed for SOHO, so you can put your losers WP:OR thoughts away for own mental matters.

--Ramu50 (talk) 18:56, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

User:Ramu50: Two points:
  • Read Wikipedia:Civility - that is no way to conduct yourself on Wikipedia. That kind of language gets editors blocked or banned.
  • I do know what SOHO is, because I read the article on it. I think you are saying it should be included on the Linux template because home offices can use Linux? By way of analogy: The Linux system was developed to be used on a desk in a house or in an office, but it wouldn't make any logical sense to put those links into the template either. I still think I am missing something here, because I am not understanding why you think it should be in a Linux navigation template. Can you please explain it without the profanities so I can understand your reasoning? - Ahunt (talk) 22:43, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
SOHO is just a vague marketing term used for any product that is aimed at people who work from home or small businesses. Just because one edition of one obscure Linux distro has "SOHO" in its name is no rationale for that link being in this navbox. Letdorf (talk) 11:47, 25 November 2008 (UTC).
That explanation makes sense to me. The critical thing is that this nav box is for Linux-related topics. At the very minimum when a reader clicks on any link in the box it should bring them to an article that at least mentions Linux once in it. - Ahunt (talk) 14:39, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Through the Linux Operating System, there have been specific distributions targeted at each different field, some in networking, entertainment, specific architecture, informatics research, SOHO...etc. So there should be no reason why minor one like Thin Client can be kept, while SOHO also a minor can't. Also you have no evidence that SOHO is a marketing term, that is purely your own thoughts, WP:OR.

They are some interpretations SOHO does encompass Home Networking. Usually home networking includes SFF form factor server with or without a mini-home networking database. Some uses HTPC, while other uses the mini-database with SFF form factor and their have been specific developement including: AMD DTX form factor, Intel UrbanMax concept, more SFF form factor types...etc.

There even was a project aim at SFF minicluster which could be use as SOHO if desired.

Specific SOHO products

News reporters Sofptedia even have a dedicated news tag in these specific field http://news.softpedia.com/newsTag/SOHO. --Ramu50 (talk) 22:11, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

The "Thin client" link in the navbox links to the Linux Terminal Server Project, which is specfically a Linux development project. The WP article on Small office/home office says: the term "Small or Home Office" and its variants —along with the acronym "SOHO"— have been used to a great extent by companies who market products targeting the great numbers of small businesses which have a tiny or medium sized office. So, no that's not just my "own thoughts". I've no idea why you've started talking about form factors now, that doesn't really have much to do with this navbox either. Letdorf (talk) 23:28, 28 November 2008 (UTC).

Wikimedia bug?

The word Linux in the title is a link in the source code, but on the Linux page, it's not. Is that intentional? 142.59.175.105 (talk) 05:57, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

It's intentional. There's no point having a link to Linux on the Linux page, so the code disables links which point to the current page. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:16, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

GNU Operating System

User:Grandscribe has repeatedly tried to insert the words "GNU Operating System" into this template and also into many other articles on Wikipedia. In this template this has been repeatedly removed by several editors, showing no consensus to include this. I think that the inclusion of this is inappropriate for three related reasons:

  • There is no article called "GNU Operating System". The wikilink to this is a redirect to GNU which deals with the GNU project and the proposed operating system it intends to create.
  • There is no "GNU Operating System", only a project to create one, which as Richard Stallman recently said this summer is still incomplete because the Hurd kernel is not complete.
  • If there really were an operational "GNU Operating System" then it should not be linked in this template about Linux anyway, because it would not contain the Linux kernel or any other Linux components anyway.

The "GNU" section in this template is included because some GNU tools, compilers and licences, etc are used in most Linux systems. It is interesting to note that the equivalent GNU nav template Template:GNU does not include any links to Linux at all, save for GNU/Linux naming controversy, even though most operational systems that use any GNU components also use the Linux kernel. - Ahunt (talk) 14:14, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree with your analysis. I have no problem including a link to GNU. However, piping it for apparently POV reasons has no place in the template. Yworo (talk) 14:16, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Hans Reiser

I don't think he needs to be here he's no longer active, and there are more important filesystems and corresponding people eg ext4, btrfs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.74.75.39 (talk) 02:13, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protection

User:HJ Mitchell semi-protected this template with the summary "Protected Template:Linux: requested at RfPP, high visibility template using TW ([edit=autoconfirmed] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite))" but I am not seeing a history of vandalism in the edit summary. Is this really justified? - Ahunt (talk) 12:06, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Discussed at User_talk:HJ_Mitchell#Template_semi-protection. - Ahunt (talk) 12:49, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit semi-protected request

Please remove Devices redlink as the target page has been deleted (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Linux-powered devices). 86.173.125.104 (talk) 01:57, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out - done! - Ahunt (talk) 12:08, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 December 2013

Please add a link to Seccomp to the "Security Modules" section, because seccomp is a security module that is used in real-world software (see article) but not yet referenced very often on Wikipedia (see Special:WhatLinksHere/Seccomp). 91.11.95.58 (talk) 19:29, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 21:31, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Linux/Archive_1&oldid=707833835"