---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Subject: list EUG-LUG: List Message Rejected
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 20:41:47 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 g134fT419354;
Sat, 2 Feb 2002 20:41:30 -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 VAA23383;
Sat, 2 Feb 2002 21:41:28 -0700 (MST)
Received: (from rms@localhost)
by aztec.santafe.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.9.3) id g134fSG02084;
Sat, 2 Feb 2002 21:41:28 -0700 (MST)
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 21:41:28 -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]
Subject: Re: GNU Stuff
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[Would you please forward this to the list?]
we
all know where <*some of*> the software comes from.
My experience is that most users of the GNU/Linux system have never
even heard of GNU. The people in Justin's circle may be partially
knowledgeable; they may know that certain programs were developed by
the GNU Project. That doesn't mean they have the right picture of
where the system came from.
It is hard for people to learn the right picture when the materials
they read tell them the wrong picture. That's why I ask EUGLUG to
call the system "GNU/Linux" and help correct the widespread mistake.
get off your ego-trip and take what you're given.
I am not a Buddha. I do have an ego, and it is surely gratified to
see people mention GNU. But my ego is not the issue--the issue is to
do the right thing. What matters is for users to know that the system
is the practical result of idealism--it was developed primariby in a
sustained campaign for freedom.
Waiting for something to be given is not the way to succeed--not in
business, not in science, and not in social change. Success calls for
active efforts. Correcting misinformation calls for active efforts,
too.
as far as sharing the limelight, which i'm sure will be brought up,
let's point out that without Linus, you wouldn't have a strong vehicle from
which to promote your stance.
Linus made a significant contribution to that system. That's one of
the reasons to call it "GNU/Linux" and not just "GNU".
> The one thing that I didn't understand tho, is why RMS is marketing GNU
> as an operating system.
We are not "marketing" GNU at all--it is not a commercial product, it
is a community project.
We describe GNU as an operating system because that was the target.
>From day one, when no code existed, the goal was to develop an
operating system. Everything we have done for GNU has been aimed at
this goal.
This practice is perfectly normal, but I've noticed that people who
want to call the system "Linux" often criticize perfectly normal
things that we do. Various perfectly normal things. Meanwhile, they
don't criticize others who do the same things. Apparently these
things are wrong only when the GNU Project does them.
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.
It was an unfinished operating system. Anything you build starts out
unfinished. When we started developing GNU, it was missing almost
everything. By 1991, much less was missing.
By the way, the GNU kernel is working now. There is even a GNU/Hurd
User Group listed in our user groups page.
> 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.
It makes no sense to give so much importance to my personal feelings.
There are more important things at stake here. EUGLUG should call the
system by the right name in order to inform the users of the real
origin of the system.
-------------------------------------------------------
