On 8/4/05, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sascha Wilde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Yes, that is exactly my point, I think Richard is right:
> > Linux is just a program "in the usual sense".
>
> But I was talking about GNU/Linux. It seems you don't even get the
> difference we are talking about.
[jumping in]
Perhaps in a parallel universe you were talking about GNU/Linux. In
this universe, you said:
> Linux is not really a program in the usual sense.
Richard retorted:
> It is a program, in the usual sense of the word.
> You must have some unusual sense of the word in mind.
And you countered:
> Looks more like a collection of services to me, somewhat like a library.
So definitely you were talking (or at least, you were *writing*) about
Linux, not GNU/Linux. I cannot even begin to imagine how could you
define GNU/Linux as "a collection of services", or worse, "like a
library".
God knows I don't have the slightest intention of stopping this little
flamewar, but to my eyes, and I think most programmers', Linux is of
course a program "in the usual sense" even if it is an operating
system kernel too (both things not being mutually exclusive, of
course)...
--
/L/e/k/t/u
_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
