Re: The GNU thing
The key thing is that GCC was responsible for creating Linux. The other programs would have been written if they didn't already exist. Since they DID already exist, there was no point in wasting the effort to reinvent wheels and these other programs were SUPPOSED to be free. Now we see that there is a big giant string attached to using them. You can use them but you have to attach the letters GNU/ to your system if you do. I simply think it is in poor taste for Stallman to make this argument and this is the first comment Linus has ever said even remotely near the issue in public. Basicly he said that the GNU project is of little/no importance to Linux and I agree. If the GNU project had been the first to bundle Linux with the other GNU programs, they might have a claim. Since others simply grabbed the GNU stuff because it was handy, RMS has no claim. The thing will probably backfire in his face. In the desire to be truly free there has already started at least one effort to port the BSD stuff. There is no use in arguing about what is the correct name, if you produce a distribution, you are free to call it whatever you want. The problem is that nobody should have the right to tell someone else what to name their stuff. It is a freedom issue. I would have second thoughts about using some free software and then have the people that gave me the software try to dictate to me additional terms not in the license after the fact. Anything that is not in the license cannot be forced on you. All (I think) stallmann wants is a little recognition. A lot of people seem to think the world revolves around Linus, but without all of the thousands of people who've helped him, his kernel would be nothing but an lone experiment slowly disappearing as the floppies it was stored on degrade. The GNU stuff is very nice and very important, just like the kernel. If GNU had never existed I think linux would finally reach its current state around 2007. In the mean time I'd have no choice except MS2000 and Solaris x86. -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null ___ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
Re: The GNU thing
On Fri, Mar 26, 1999 at 09:20:19AM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote: On Fri, 26 Mar 1999, E.L. Meijer (Eric) wrote: : : 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software : must display the following acknowledgement: : : This product includes software developed by the University of : California, Berkeley and its contributors. : I can't stand AOL, but AOL! Thanks for making this point. The advertising clause isn't as bad as it sounds. It only says that if we put out a press release or brochure or some other advertising material that mentions that we include the program `blah' which has the above license, we have to include that acknowledgement. If the advertising doesn't mention `blah', we don't have to include the acknowledgement. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3TYD [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5 CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome. http://hamish.home.ml.org
Re: The GNU thing
I wrote: Where are you getting this? I know of nothing that requires any such thing. George Bonser writes: Tell Stallman that, http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/technology/zdnet/story.html?s=n/zdnet/technology/19990325/19990325301 So? This is old news. So RMS has his opinion. I have mine, and it differs from his on this point. He can no more require anyone to label anything 'GNU' than I can forbid them to do so. I repeat: I know of nothing that requires any such thing. -- John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address.
Re: The GNU thing
On 25 Mar 1999, John Hasler wrote: Where are you getting this? I know of nothing that requires any such thing. Tell Stallman that, Stallman asks people to consider calling their operating system GNU/linux (http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html). Since Linus acknowledged that the GNU C compiler was critical to the development of linux, one may consider this reasonable. Otherwise, one may ignore all this and not mention GNU in the name just as well. Yet otherwise, one may decide to get mightily angry about it, and declare to prefer the BSD license, which contains the following clause: 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software must display the following acknowledgement: This product includes software developed by the University of California, Berkeley and its contributors. HTH, Eric -- E.L. Meijer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Eindhoven Univ. of Technology Lab. for Catalysis and Inorg. Chem. (SKA)
Re: The GNU thing
On Fri, 26 Mar 1999, E.L. Meijer (Eric) wrote: : : On 25 Mar 1999, John Hasler wrote: : : : Where are you getting this? I know of nothing that requires any such : thing. : : Tell Stallman that, : : Stallman asks people to consider calling their operating system : GNU/linux (http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html). Since Linus : acknowledged that the GNU C compiler was critical to the development of : linux, one may consider this reasonable. Otherwise, one may ignore all : this and not mention GNU in the name just as well. Yet otherwise, one : may decide to get mightily angry about it, and declare to prefer the : BSD license, which contains the following clause: : : : 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software : must display the following acknowledgement: : : This product includes software developed by the University of : California, Berkeley and its contributors. : I can't stand AOL, but AOL! Thanks for making this point. -- Nathan Norman MidcoNet 410 South Phillips Avenue Sioux Falls, SD mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.midco.net finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP Key: (0xA33B86E9)
Re: The GNU thing
On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, Brian Servis wrote: *- On 24 Mar, Jonathan Guthrie wrote about Re: The GNU thing I can't get xemacs-20 to suspend with CNTRL-Z on my computer so I either have to use multiple virtual terminals or do everything under X. Do you know what the problem is? It is a bug in libgpm that is tickled when xemacs is compiled with gpm support. See bugs 20356, 20398, 22651, 23686. Indeed it is. The workaround that I have implemented is I kill gpm before starting emacs. I find the text mode mouse to be pretty useless, anyway, so I'll probably just set it up so that gpm never starts again. -- Jonathan Guthrie ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Brokersys +281-895-8101 http://www.brokersys.com/ 12703 Veterans Memorial #106, Houston, TX 77014, USA
Re: The GNU thing
Jonathan Guthrie wrote: I can't get xemacs-20 to suspend with CNTRL-Z on my computer so I either have to use multiple virtual terminals or do everything under X. You didn't say what it is you need to do when you suspend XEmacs, so this may not help... Since you don't like multiple virtual terminals for some reason, have you considered shell mode _within_ emacs? I assume xemacs has it the same as emacs. Try M-x shell RET. You get a shell in an emacs buffer that you can move around in, edit and re-execute commands, all data is kept in the buffer until you delete the lines you don't want, etc. The only things that don't work are programs that use the screen like more, but hey, who needs more within Emacs? dselect won't work, etc. -- ...RickM...
Re: The GNU thing
On Wed, Mar 24, 1999 at 06:51:49AM -0600, Jonathan Guthrie wrote: On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, David B. Teague wrote: The importance of compilers was one reason I chose to license Linux under the GNU Public License (GPL). The GPL was the license for the GCC compiler. I think that all the other projects from the GNU group are for Linux insignificant in comparison. I think this statement is absolute truth. Linux wouldn't exist without GCC, but it certainly could without textutils or shellutils and suchlike. interesting opinion. Maybe you never tried to dpkg --purge --force-depends --force-essential those packages. Sure, you may miss boring things like cat, echo, date for a few days (after you got used to it), well, after you managed to log in your broken system. The boot scripts won't run at all without bash and those tools... Sure, make is irrelevant. We can use any broken make from other systems (are there other make's?), except for some programs which require GNU make. You won't be able to compile in a sub directory, though, using VPATH. This may prevent compilation of quite some Debian packages. but, without the above tools, you won't be able to compile them anyway. Personally, I'd miss perl a lot. Too bad that its configure script checks for cat and alike. I have heard that BSD has replaced some of the tools. Maybe it would be possible to port them to linux. But then, some sort of textutils you need. In this regard, I find Linus' comment utterly bullshit and closed-minded. OTOH, I would not hesitate to call Linux insignificant, compared with the GNU projects. Marcus readying his flame-proof suite. -- `Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org finger brinkmd@ Marcus Brinkmann GNUhttp://www.gnu.org master.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]for public PGP Key http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
Re: The GNU thing
On Thu, 25 Mar 1999, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: I think this statement is absolute truth. Linux wouldn't exist without GCC, but it certainly could without textutils or shellutils and suchlike. interesting opinion. Maybe you never tried to dpkg --purge --force-depends --force-essential those packages. So you're saying that the FSF is the only possible source of things like ls, rm, mv, etc? And here I thought that the BSD folks had written their own. Gosh, the responsibility of being the only folks on the face of the earth who are CAPABLE of producing a make or a sed must be absolutely awesome! Where do I go to bow down to their feet? My point is not that nobody uses those systems, but that anyone with even marginal skill can write those programs. GCC is harder to replace. But then, some sort of textutils you need. In this regard, I find Linus' comment utterly bullshit and closed-minded. OTOH, I would not hesitate to call Linux insignificant, compared with the GNU projects. Reminds me of the joke: Q: What's the difference between Linux and GNU? A: Linux has a kernel that boots. While that isn't strictly true any more, it was true for a long time. It is still true, if you aren't willing to run beta code. If the FSF is full of such SH programmers, why couldn't they cobble together something in a couple of months? I did it years ago. (The answer, of course, is that they don't know how to write the essential stuff first and let the rest just happen. That's how Linus got so far ahead without a dedicated following or taxpayer support.) One more thing: You talk about missing perl because it depends upon cat. If you are unable to write a cat (it's about 20 lines of C, fer crissake!) or an ls or an rm then you don't deserve an opinion about whose work in necessary and whose isn't. -- Jonathan Guthrie ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Brokersys +281-895-8101 http://www.brokersys.com/ 12703 Veterans Memorial #106, Houston, TX 77014, USA
Re: The GNU thing
On Thu, 25 Mar 1999, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: I think this statement is absolute truth. Linux wouldn't exist without GCC, but it certainly could without textutils or shellutils and suchlike. interesting opinion. Maybe you never tried to dpkg --purge --force-depends --force-essential those packages. So you're saying that the FSF is the only possible source of things like ls, rm, mv, etc? And here I thought that the BSD folks had written their own. Gosh, the responsibility of being the only folks on the face of the earth who are CAPABLE of producing a make or a sed must be absolutely awesome! Where do I go to bow down to their feet? My point is not that nobody uses those systems, but that anyone with even marginal skill can write those programs. GCC is harder to replace. make is hard to replace grep is hard to replace sed is hard to replace diff is hard to replace awk is hard to replace bison is hard to replace flex is hard to replace ... in the sense that even people with more than marginal skills will need a lot of time to write it. By the way, do we really need flame bait to raise traffic in this list? Peace, :) Eric -- E.L. Meijer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Eindhoven Univ. of Technology Lab. for Catalysis and Inorg. Chem. (SKA)
Re: The GNU thing
George Bonser writes: The other programs would have been written if they didn't already exist. Since they DID already exist, there was no point in wasting the effort to reinvent wheels and these other programs were SUPPOSED to be free. Now we see that there is a big giant string attached to using them. You can use them but you have to attach the letters GNU/ to your system if you do. Where are you getting this? I know of nothing that requires any such thing. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI
Re: The GNU thing
On Tue, 23 Mar 1999, George Bonser wrote: I thought the following comment from Linus was interesting. It comes from an article he wrote at www.linuxworld.com ... The importance of compilers was one reason I chose to license Linux under the GNU Public License (GPL). The GPL was the license for the GCC compiler. I think that all the other projects from the GNU group are for Linux insignificant in comparison. GCC is the only one that I really care about. A number of them I hate with a passion; the Emacs editor is horrible, for example. While Linux is larger than Emacs, at least Linux has the excuse that it needs to be. ...Linus Torvalds Hi George Sounds like religion to me. Religion is religion no matter who pronounces it. Emacs is a religion. Some hate it, some love it. Few are neutral. I love Emacs. I respect those who use small editors and restart the editor for each compilation error. With great respect for Linus, George B, and all the rest of those who make _MY_ operating system and its ecoutrements possible and useful, I am David Teague [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian GNU/Linux: Because the support is free and the best anywhere. The software is useful, free, easy to use and stable.
Re: The GNU thing
On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, David B. Teague wrote: The importance of compilers was one reason I chose to license Linux under the GNU Public License (GPL). The GPL was the license for the GCC compiler. I think that all the other projects from the GNU group are for Linux insignificant in comparison. I think this statement is absolute truth. Linux wouldn't exist without GCC, but it certainly could without textutils or shellutils and suchlike. the Emacs editor is horrible, for example. While Linux is larger than Emacs, at least Linux has the excuse that it needs to be. Emacs is a religion. Some hate it, some love it. Few are neutral. I love Emacs. I respect those who use small editors and restart the editor for each compilation error. Okay, so emacs is a religion, I can deal with that. I use emacs the editor quite a bit. However, I can't get xemacs-20 to suspend with CNTRL-Z on my computer so I either have to use multiple virtual terminals or do everything under X. Do you know what the problem is? -- Jonathan Guthrie ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Brokersys +281-895-8101 http://www.brokersys.com/ 12703 Veterans Memorial #106, Houston, TX 77014, USA
Re: The GNU thing
Jonathan Guthrie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [snip] | Okay, so emacs is a religion, I can deal with that. I use emacs the | editor quite a bit. However, I can't get xemacs-20 to suspend with | CNTRL-Z on my computer so I either have to use multiple virtual terminals | or do everything under X. | | Do you know what the problem is? When you're running it in a terminal window you can't get it to suspend when you hit Ctrl+Z? Is your suspend character set to Ctrl+Z? At the Unix prompt do a stty -a. What's it say for susp = . It should, for example, be susp = ^Z and you can set it by doing % stty susp ^V^Z The ^V is the bash shells literal quote key. It just says to treat the next key you hit literally and not to interpret it. Of course this is also a terminal setting, it shows as the lnext character when you do the stty -a. Gary
Re: The GNU thing
On 24 Mar 1999, Gary L. Hennigan wrote: Jonathan Guthrie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | Okay, so emacs is a religion, I can deal with that. I use emacs the | editor quite a bit. However, I can't get xemacs-20 to suspend with | CNTRL-Z on my computer so I either have to use multiple virtual terminals | or do everything under X. | Do you know what the problem is? When you're running it in a terminal window you can't get it to suspend when you hit Ctrl+Z? Yes. Is your suspend character set to Ctrl+Z? Yes. (I also verified this by doing the stty -a, just to be sure.) The symptoms (gosh, wouldn't have been nice for me to include the symptoms the first time) are different from those I would expect for a different, or missing, suspend character. xemacs stops taking input, but won't start the shell. I can hit ^C a couple of times and get xemacs' attention, but the only thing it'll let me do is abort the edit and dump core (and it won't do the core dump because the default core size, as set by ulimit, is 0, and I never remember to change that before I run emacs.) This is under Debian 2.1 as most recently released, kernel V2.2.3, and xemacs20-nomule-20.4-13. (FWIW, it also does this if I use the mule executable, not that it should make any difference.) Is it possible that the .emacs or the .xemacs-options file has something in it that could cause this behavior? -- Jonathan Guthrie ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Brokersys +281-895-8101 http://www.brokersys.com/ 12703 Veterans Memorial #106, Houston, TX 77014, USA
Emacs Trouble (was Re: The GNU thing)
Jonathan Guthrie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | On 24 Mar 1999, Gary L. Hennigan wrote: | | Jonathan Guthrie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | | | Okay, so emacs is a religion, I can deal with that. I use emacs the | | editor quite a bit. However, I can't get xemacs-20 to suspend with | | CNTRL-Z on my computer so I either have to use multiple virtual terminals | | or do everything under X. | | | Do you know what the problem is? | | When you're running it in a terminal window you can't get it to | suspend when you hit Ctrl+Z? | | Yes. | | Is your suspend character set to Ctrl+Z? | | Yes. (I also verified this by doing the stty -a, just to be sure.) | | The symptoms (gosh, wouldn't have been nice for me to include the symptoms | the first time) are different from those I would expect for a different, | or missing, suspend character. | | xemacs stops taking input, but won't start the shell. I can hit ^C a | couple of times and get xemacs' attention, but the only thing it'll let me | do is abort the edit and dump core (and it won't do the core dump because | the default core size, as set by ulimit, is 0, and I never remember to | change that before I run emacs.) | | This is under Debian 2.1 as most recently released, kernel V2.2.3, and | xemacs20-nomule-20.4-13. (FWIW, it also does this if I use the mule | executable, not that it should make any difference.) | | Is it possible that the .emacs or the .xemacs-options file has something | in it that could cause this behavior? I suppose you could've somehow overridden the suspend-emacs function. Try that function manually, i.e., from within XEmacs do: M-x suspend-emacs and see what happens. Gary
Re: The GNU thing
*- On 24 Mar, Jonathan Guthrie wrote about Re: The GNU thing Okay, so emacs is a religion, I can deal with that. I use emacs the editor quite a bit. However, I can't get xemacs-20 to suspend with CNTRL-Z on my computer so I either have to use multiple virtual terminals or do everything under X. Do you know what the problem is? It is a bug in libgpm that is tickled when xemacs is compiled with gpm support. See bugs 20356, 20398, 22651, 23686. -- Brian - Never criticize anybody until you have walked a mile in their shoes, because by that time you will be a mile away and have their shoes. - unknown Mechanical Engineering[EMAIL PROTECTED] Purdue University http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/~servis -
