That depends a whole lot on what is in a bare bones system, does it not?
I feel confident that I can build an entire bare bones system without
having any programs in this system being from GNU packages.
The GNU percentage depends highly on what the distribution provider puts
Since I deal mostly in 'bare bones' systems such as firewalls and
tightened machines, the GNU percentage is very low. I would venture to
say I have significantly more programs of other origin than GNU.
Therefore, my definition of bare bones systems is opposite what yours is.
Linux is Linux, what's added on after that is a varying figure.
my two bytes on the subject,
Roger Leigh wrote:
>A distribution is much more than an operation system. If you just look
>at the core components that make up the OS (I'm sure that there will be
>plenty of contention regarding what these are ;-) then you have a Linux
>kernel, and GNU tools. Most of the other programs are not essential--a
>bare bones system will be mostly GNU stuff.
>When talking about the kernel, `Linux' is appropriate, but when talking
>about the /operating system/ as a whole `GNU/Linux' is more accurate,
>especially since you could replace the kernel with Hurd or BSD and from
>the POV of the user (or programmer) there would be little noticeable
>change but the GNU part would still be there. The GNU tools are the
>actual part the user (and programmer) will interact with, be it bash,
>grep, gcc or glibc.
>Just my tuppence,
Gimp-developer mailing list