---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Subject: list EUG-LUG: List Message Rejected
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 20:40:39 PST
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Your recent message to the EUG-LUG list has been
rejected for the following reason:
Only list subscribers may send messages to this list.
If you need assistance, please contact the list owner at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The text of your message follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Received: from pele.santafe.edu (pele.santafe.edu [192.12.12.119])
by clavin.efn.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g134eU419184;
Sat, 2 Feb 2002 20:40:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aztec.santafe.edu (aztec [192.12.12.49])
by pele.santafe.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA23142;
Sat, 2 Feb 2002 21:40:28 -0700 (MST)
Received: (from rms@localhost)
by aztec.santafe.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.9.3) id g134eSP01952;
Sat, 2 Feb 2002 21:40:28 -0700 (MST)
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 21:40:28 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Authentication-Warning: aztec.santafe.edu: rms set sender to rms@aztec
using -f From: Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In-reply-to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (message from Jamie
on Fri, 1 Feb 2002 12:31:20 -0800)
Subject: Re: list EUG-LUG: List Message Rejected
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Since your on the
topic of the right thing to do, shouldnt you change all your references
of GNU/Linux to Linux/GNU, since GNU wouldnt be much without linux?
Both parts are essential. The GNU/Linux system wouldn't run without
Linux, and it wouldn't run without GNU. So if we apply your standard
fairly, it is inconclusive.
We write the "GNU" first because we launched the system's development,
and our contribution to it is much larger than Linux is. However, if
you write "Linux/GNU", that is much better than just "Linux".
There is not GNU kernel,
There is now, but there wasn't one in the 90s. That's why the GNU/Linux
variant of GNU is the one that caught on during that period.
and you need to boot the linux kernel to take advantage of the
GNU software included with every [GNU/]linux distribution...
The reverse is also true--Linux, being just a kernel, wouldn't run
without the GNU system. The combination of the two is what you use.
That is why the name GNU/Linux is appropriate for it.
What is most noteworthy in your message is that you are selectively
applying your arguments. Over the years I've seen this many times. I
think it results from the attachment that people develop to the false
picture of history spread by calling the system "Linux". They are
sure that the kernel is more important than all the rest of the system
put together, but they have to improvise to find some reason why that
should be so. Often the reason comes down to a double standard.
If you would like to subscribe to our list,
Thanks, but I get too much email already. epcraig, if I mail to the
list and it bounces, do you get those messages? Can you send them
through? Or should I cc you?
-------------------------------------------------------
