> On Thu, 2007-02-01 at 07:36 -0800, Shawn Walker > wrote: > > > >On Jan 31, 2007, at 20:52, Alan DuBoff wrote: > > > > > > > >> On Wednesday 31 January 2007 09:21 am, John > > > Sonnenschein wrote: > > > >>> If Stallman and the rest of the FSF start > > > promoting Solaris instead > > > >>> of that other kernel, and they would if we > went > > > gpl3, that would be > > > >>> more helpful to the project than any amount > of > > > code or advertising in > > > >>> the world > > > >> > > > >> Yeah, right...I'll hold my breath for that... > > > > > > > >Actually I have had plenty of direct input from > them > > > that suggests > > > >this is exactly what would happen. > > > > > > And this would matter how exactly? > > > > > > It's well known that there's a spat between Linux > > > (Sorry, GNU/Linux) > > > and the FSF; Hurd is the FSF's current OS and it > is > > > going nowhere; > > > they'd be switching from Hurd to Solaris. Is > that > > > the kind of company > > > we want to keep? > > > > > > Casper > > > _______________________________________________ > > > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > So will Stallman ask us to call it GNU/Solaris? It > obviously doesn't apply to Solaris since we have our > own compiler, etc. and don't need GNU tools to exist > (as far as I know). > > Solaris is a distribution of Sun Microsystem, only > Sun can decide to go > with GNU userland. > > On the other hand, we already have GNU/OpenSolaris > NexentaOS: > http://www.gnusolaris.org > > -- > Erast > > _______________________________________________ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > [email protected] >
Right, we know that. I was just pointing out that unlike Linux, it's perfectly fair to NOT call an OpenSolaris distribution GNU/Solaris unless it was built with and depends on GNU tools :) -Shawn This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
