Keith Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Keith Thompson wrote:
[...]
One can call GNU/Linux for GNU if one wants to, much like one calls
OpenBSD for simply BSD. Often when I am a bit lazy and someone asks
me what operating system I use I just
One can call GNU/Linux for GNU if one wants to, much like one
calls OpenBSD for simply BSD. Often when I am a bit lazy and
someone asks me what operating system I use I just say GNU, or a
variant of GNU.
So if you want to be a bit lazy, it's acceptable to refer to
GNU/Linux
The GNU project named the system GNU, and that is why it should be
called GNU, it is that simple. If you create a deriviate of BSD, it
does not magically stop being BSD.
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One does not call BSD using Mach for
Mach, one calls it BSD.
I'm not sure what you mean by for Mach, but if you mean one doesn't
call it Mach then you're mistaken. I have often heard people refer
to it that way, and I can't
One does not call BSD using Mach for Mach, one calls it BSD.
I'm not sure what you mean by for Mach, but if you mean one
doesn't call it Mach then you're mistaken. I have often heard
people refer to it that way, and I can't recall ever hearing them
refer to it as BSD.
Would be
Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One does not call BSD using Mach for Mach, one calls it BSD.
I'm not sure what you mean by for Mach, but if you mean one
doesn't call it Mach then you're mistaken. I have often heard
people refer to it that way, and I can't recall ever
Noah Slater wrote:
On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 08:29:12PM -0500, rjack wrote:
Why did the duck cross the road?
To troll the mailing list, evidently.
Nope. He was tied to the chicken.
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
On Dec 7, 3:43 pm, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 12:21:07PM -0800, mike3 wrote:
Hmm, so does this mean that the reason why GNU deserves credit
in the _name_ and not somewhere else is because GNU's contribution
is so significant -- they pretty much
On Dec 9, 4:05 am, Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The GNU project named the system GNU, and that is why it should be
called GNU, it is that simple. If you create a deriviate of BSD, it
does not magically stop being BSD.
So then the only really reasonably way to give credit is to
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Dec 7, 3:43 pm, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 12:21:07PM -0800, mike3 wrote:
Hmm, so does this mean that the reason why GNU deserves credit
in the _name_ and not somewhere else is because GNU's contribution
is
Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm not sure what you mean by for Mach, but if you mean one
doesn't call it Mach then you're mistaken. I have often heard
people refer to it that way, and I can't recall ever hearing them
refer to it as BSD.
Would be the first time I
One does not call BSD using Mach for Mach, one calls it BSD.
I'm not sure what you mean by for Mach, but if you mean one
doesn't call it Mach then you're mistaken. I have often
heard people refer to it that way, and I can't recall ever
hearing them refer to
I'm not sure what you mean by for Mach, but if you mean one
doesn't call it Mach then you're mistaken. I have often heard
people refer to it that way, and I can't recall ever hearing them
refer to it as BSD.
Would be the first time I have heard it, and I have
On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 11:40:21AM -0800, mike3 wrote:
Wasn't questioning why they wanted recognition, I was just asking
about the _proper place_ for recognition.
This is so funny! Why are people even bothering to reply to mike3? How
many times has he asked this same question?
More than 5, 10,
On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 10:12:38PM +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
I think you mean `an eggplant', now who has the dirty face?
I don't think he did.
--
Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/
Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as
society is free to use the results. - R.
Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Or, put differently, you got eggplant on your face.
I think you mean `an eggplant', now who has the dirty face?
Eggplant without an is a mass-noun referring to the material of an
eggplant. Something you're much more likely to have on your face
In article
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if there were no software patents, there'd be no more to sue over,
Software companies were protecting their wares with copyright long
before the PTO started allowing software patents.
--
Barry Margolin, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 06:45:39AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
Eggplant without an is a mass-noun referring to the material of an
eggplant. Something you're much more likely to have on your face than a
whole single eggplant...
I approve of this thread. ;)
--
Noah Slater
18 matches
Mail list logo
