On Sat, Nov 16, 2002 at 01:29:54AM +1300, Peter Elliott wrote:
> > but those tools run on windows too.
> > GNU/windows???
> > surely the kernel is the most significant part of the OS.
> > the rest are tools to control the OS, they don't make it up.
> i'm sorry but i just can't let that go by uncommented.
> surely you know the history?
yup.
> you know, the one about rms and co building a free alternative to all
> the commercial unices that were around at that time - from the self
> describing recursive lispy joke "Gnu's Not Unix" on up.
of course.
> most of those wonderful tools we use all of the time had been done,
> or were nearly so, and virtually the only thing missing in order to
> have a complete os was a kernel.
the FSF is building much more than an OS, it's building an operating
environment and an OS.
> so no the kernel's not really the most significant part of the os at
> all (in the sense that i've taken you to be meaning)
what i wrote was not to belittle the work of the FSF.
i admire them and am a devotred follower.
i am talking about the definition of "Operating System".
the characteristics of an OS are set by the kernel.
hence for an OS the kernel is most important.
the GNU tools are important to get the operating environment, the kernel
is important to get the operating system.
i can leave away the GNU tools and still have an OS (can't do much on
it, but that's another matter. if i leave away the kernel then i have a
set of tools, but the OS these tolls run on, is decided by the hosting
kernel.
the kernel is the most significant part needed to fullfill the
definition of an OS, the tools are the most significant part for anyone
to make the most out of a computer.
so we are basicly agreeing on what is most important in general
(i repeat it is not the kernel)
we are only disagreeing on the definition of "operating system"
> and yes, as you will have guessed, i am one of 'those'.
(couldn't find a clear reference for 'those', but i am guessing that i
am as well.)
> ie i think we should refer to the object of this user group's attentions
> as gnu/linux in the same manner and spirit that the debian community do,
i agree, as mentioned above, as linux definetly does not mean more than
the kernel.
however i prefer to go a few steps further and would like to stress that
the actuall object of our attention should be "free software" in general,
not only linux and gnu, but anything that is free.
as such linux (the kernel) represents the success of free software in
this time. i'd rather have all thew world talk about linux (without gnu)
than a few unknown people to talk about gnu/linux while the rest of the
world sticks to windows.
greetings, martin.
--
interested in doing pike programming, sTeam/caudium/pike/roxen training,
sTeam/caudium/roxen and/or unix system administration anywhere in the world.
--
pike programmer working in europe csl-gmbh.net
open-steam.org (www.archlab|(www|db).hb2).tuwien.ac.at
unix bahai.or.at iaeste.(tuwien.ac|or).at
systemadministrator (stuts|black.linux-m68k).org is.(schon.org|root.at)
Martin B�hr http://www.iaeste.or.at/~mbaehr/
