While I see why it's happened, I wish these threads hadn't spread
themselves over two EUGLUG lists (ome of which, [EMAIL PROTECTED], is not
linked from www.euglug.org, and maybe not archived at all), and I'm really
unhappy that while RMS is a major subject of them, so much of them is
hidden from him by those of us neglecting to cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Jim Beard wrote: > Howdy, > > I was gonna remain silent about all this, since I don't really have > much of an opinion about it. At least not one I wanted to make > public ;) But something finally got to me. I read a bunch of the > documents on the GNU site about why it should be called GNU/Linux and > how they relate, etc, etc.. > The one thing that I didn't understand tho, is why RMS is marketing GNU > as an operating system. It says on the GNU website that they do not > have a working kernel ( hence linux ) and they do not have a working > boot/install process. So I'm a little taken back. I would think that > the technical term for an "operating system" would be something along > the lines of "everything you need to run a computer". I would think > that any operating system that is lacking a kernel and a boot/install > process is not really an operating system at all. I could understand > how if you defined operating system in a non-technical way, it might > just mean any group of stuff that lets you accomplish things, which GNU > certainly does. But RMS is a very technical man, so why would a > non-technical definition be used? > > Also, Remember when google announced all the usenet archives? Well > I went back when they did, and read a bunch of the first posts about > linux and GNU and stuff. I remember seeing some heated flame threads > between RMS and Linus. These guys were not friends then, and I don't > know if they are now. But basically RMS was posting about how linux was > silly because GNU was gonna do it all, and Linus would post about how > Linux was a pet project so it didn't matter, and that at that time all > the GNU stuff was inefficient. But the whole series of posts left me > thinking that RMS was bitter and upset that Linus got so much > recognition and he didn't. So, when I read some of the documentation on > the GNU site about why it needs to be called GNU/Linux and what the > relation is between GNU and Linux I wasn't too surprised to feel the > same recognition jealousy. The GNU web site had this underlying current > of "Linux was a good thing and its ok, but GNU makes the world go round". > > I guess I was just left with the impression that RMS is upset > because every 12 year old nerd has a wet dream about Linus but no one > says his name in awe. His recent posts to our list and the attention he > has given our web pages made me feel like we are just a pawn in his > tawdry emotional turmoil. > > Flame away, > Jim > -- Ed Craig [EMAIL PROTECTED] Taxi (I need an income) GNU/Linux (I can afford a Free OS) Think this through with me, let me know your mind... Hunter/Garcia
