uname has been around a long time (GNU and others), but the -o option is relatively recent.

Back in Nov 1994, the sh-utils tarball included uname (download it: http://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/sh-utils/). This was well after Linux started, in fact, the kernel was heading towards 1.2 at that stage. I'm not sure how uname was distributed before then. I have a linux CD from about May 1994 which I should have a look at. In any case, the options uname had in 1994 are (from the source code):

/* Option               Example

   -s, --sysname        SunOS
   -n, --nodename       rocky8
   -r, --release        4.0
   -v, --version
   -m, --machine        sun
   -a, --all            SunOS rocky8 4.0  sun

   The default behavior is equivalent to `-s'.

   David MacKenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> */

The source code changed very little through to the final release of sh-utils (version 2.0) in August 1999, by which time it had gained only two more options, a --help and a --processor

No kernel/OS split there...

Note that RMS's rumblings on this issue started about 1997 (see the copyright notice in http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html)

The sh-utils tarball was merged with 2 others to create the coreutils tarball which we know and love today. The first release of coreutils was April 2003 (version 5.0), and by then, the source code of uname had changed quite a bit more, and we have the options that are present today. Looking in the changelog we see...

2001-09-03  Paul Eggert  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* coreutils.texi:
New 'uname' options -i or --hardware-platform,
and -o or --operating-system.
'uname -a' now outputs -i and -o information at the end.
New uname option --kernel-version is an alias for -v.
Uname option --release has been renamed to --kernel-release,
and --sysname has been renamed to --kernel-name;
the old options will work for a while, but are no longer documented.

So the kernel/os split in uname is less than 3yrs old, and occurred about 4yrs after RMS starting complaining about GNU not being in the Linux name. (I vaguely remember a proposal about that time to rename the GNU + Linux system to Lignux, which is both clever and yucky at the same time. "Lignux? Gno!" someone was heard to exclaim.)

I can't even remember the point of why I'm doing this now...

I think the whole GNU/Linux thing is a bit silly, really. I can see where RMS is coming from, but, like other words in the English language (free, for example), Linux is popularly used with two meanings: the kernel and the OS.

Languages change, for better or worse. Look at the word "hacker", or "gay". Who would insist on saying (and, furthermore, trying to make everybody else say) "gay/homosexual" while trying to reserving "gay" as a synonym for happy and carefree? Nobody. It's ridiculous. The language has changed. Move on. Get over it. RMS is just to prideful to back down, I think.

Now, we have Linux the OS, and Linux the kernel. If there is a need to differentiate, we can say Linux distribution, and Linux kernel.

Frankly, I've got bigger things to worry about than GNU being in the name of the OS.

Today's history lesson, with FREE rant. (the 3rd meaning of free, BTW)

Reply via email to