On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 12:12:42AM -0800, Keith Thompson wrote:
Your use of the phrase the system seems to imply that only one
system is being discussed. Are you assuming that a system containing
the Linux kernel (often referred to as GNU/Linux) and a similar system
containing the Hurd kernel
Noah Slater wrote:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 12:12:42AM -0800, Keith Thompson wrote:
Your use of the phrase the system seems to imply that only one
system is being discussed. Are you assuming that a system containing
the Linux kernel (often referred to as GNU/Linux) and a similar system
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
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
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
Alfred, quoted above, said that The operating system is
called GNU. That seemed to imply that the kernel is not part
of the operating system (since the Linux kernel is not part of
GNU). I was seeking clarification on that point.
But the Hurd is part of the GNU
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 built most
of the rest of the system?
The GNU project deserves credit not only because the
I thought the operating system being discussed was the one referred to
by many people here as GNU/Linux. Are you saying that that specific
operating system, which includes the Linux kernel, should be called
just GNU? Or were you instead referring to an OS that uses the Hurd
kernel?
I guess
rjack, 2007-12-07 18:52:47:
It's the Linux operating system because the vast majority of people
call it Linux and not GNU/Linux. GNU/Linux is trying to piss up
a wall and Linux is like gravity.
And the vast majority of people refer to _Rattus rattus_ as rat. What
are you trying to say, rjack?
Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alfred, quoted above, said that The operating system is
called GNU. That seemed to imply that the kernel is not part
of the operating system (since the Linux kernel is not part of
GNU). I was seeking clarification on that
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 say GNU, or a variant of GNU.
So if you want to be a bit lazy, it's acceptable to
On Dec 7, 5:49 pm, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 04:20:57PM -0800, mike3 wrote:
On Dec 7, 2:01 pm, Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is only two pages, nothing similar to a volume. If you cannot
bother reading to simple pages, then why should we
On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 11:38:18AM -0800, mike3 wrote:
I can't help it. I can't find the answer to this exact question on any
of these pages! What can I do?
Give up your quest. Switch to windows.
--
Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/
Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so
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 built most of the rest of the
system?
One thing doesn't exclude the
On Dec 8, 2:37 am, Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The GNU project deserves credit not only because the GNU project
wrote the GNU operating system, but also because they named it.
One does not go about calling BSD for System V, despite them
being very similar.
I
Noah Slater wrote:
On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 11:38:18AM -0800, mike3 wrote:
I can't help it. I can't find the answer to this exact question on any
of these pages! What can I do?
Give up your quest. Switch to windows.
--
Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/
Creativity can be a social
On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 09:26:37PM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Why are you suggesting unethical behavior to mike3, Noah?
Because then he can troll the Windows mailing lists.
--
Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/
Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as
society is
On Dec 8, 1:03 pm, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 11:38:18AM -0800, mike3 wrote:
I can't help it. I can't find the answer to this exact question on any
of these pages! What can I do?
Give up your quest. Switch to windows.
So you want me to hate GNU? I don't
On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 01:00:48PM -0800, mike3 wrote:
So you want me to hate GNU? I don't have a grudge against
GNU. Why not just provide the answer to my question?
You guys need to lighten up and get a sense of humor.
mike3, seriously, stop asking and start using your own mind to work
out
On Dec 8, 1:50 pm, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 11:45:36AM -0800, mike3 wrote:
Am I right here?
Yes. Please drop this thread now.
Thanks for the confirmation. Yes, I'll drop it now, it's over.
I think I've finally understood it now. Goodbye!
On Dec 8, 2:51 pm, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 01:00:48PM -0800, mike3 wrote:
So you want me to hate GNU? I don't have a grudge against
GNU. Why not just provide the answer to my question?
You guys need to lighten up and get a sense of humor.
mike3,
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 say GNU, or a variant of GNU.
So if you
On 07/12/2007, Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does the following help, mini-RMS?
Seriously, WTF is this? mini-RMS? What kind of thing is that to say?
The whole passage you quoted is wrong. The POSIX specifcations lays
out what comprises an operating system (mainly a kernel, c
David Kastrup wrote:
[... crying revisionism ...]
Dear GNUtian dak, please visit
http://www.usermode.org/docs/gnulinux.html. Hth.
regards,
alexander.
--
Plaintiffs copyrights are unique and valuable property whose market
value is impossible to assess
-- SOFTWARE
Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 7 Dec 2007 at 12:01, David Kastrup wrote:
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
[... crying revisionism ...]
Dear GNUtian dak, please visit
Why change the topic? We were talking about a dedicated Linux site
which called
On 07/12/2007, Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Noah, Noah.
I find your tone patronising and objectionable.
/me bows out.
--
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. Stallman
On 07/12/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, it depends if your considering them all together:
And then you have glibc - not exactly trivial, and then bash.
On top of that you have things like gcc and GNOME.
--
Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/
Creativity can be a social
On 7 Dec 2007 at 12:01, David Kastrup wrote:
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
[... crying revisionism ...]
Dear GNUtian dak, please visit
Why change the topic? We were talking about a dedicated Linux site
which called Linux a clone of the operating
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
[... crying revisionism ...]
Dear GNUtian dak, please visit
Why change the topic? We were talking about a dedicated Linux site
which called Linux a clone of the operating system Unix and said that
this operating system clone
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 10:35:41AM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
[...]
No, Linux is a kernel, you can get all of it in a single tar ball at
http://www.kernel.org/ ... you know, neat packages called
On 2007-12-05, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course, the proper name for the operating system is GNU and Linux
provides one of it's kernels. The combination of these two words is
GNU/Linux. If you used Sun's kernel you would call the system
GNU/Solarix and if you used the BSD
David Kastrup wrote:
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
[... crying revisionism ...]
Dear GNUtian dak, please visit
Why change the topic? We were talking about a dedicated Linux site
which called Linux a clone of the operating system Unix and
On 07/12/2007, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uh no. POSIX does not lay out what it means to be a type of operating
system. It lays out what _interfaces_ must be there for certain
degrees of POSIX compliancy. It does not require the embodiment of
those interfaces to run under the
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 10:35:41AM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
[...]
No, Linux is a kernel, you can get all of it in a single tar ball at
http://www.kernel.org/ ... you know, neat packages called
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
[...]
No, Linux is a kernel, you can get all of it in a single tar ball at
http://www.kernel.org/ ... you know, neat packages called
linux-VERSION.tar.bz2 (for instance).
Have you ever visited that site, mini-RMS?
http://www.kernel.org/
quote
What is Linux?
Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 07/12/2007, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uh no. POSIX does not lay out what it means to be a type of operating
system. It lays out what _interfaces_ must be there for certain
degrees of POSIX compliancy. It does not require the embodiment
Noah Slater wrote:
[...]
An operating system is the combination of the kernel, the c library,
the shell and the core user space utilities. Nothing more, nothing
less. This is specified and standardised in the POSIX specifications -
which you have clearly not read or even familiarised your
On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 10:35:41AM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
[...]
No, Linux is a kernel, you can get all of it in a single tar ball at
http://www.kernel.org/ ... you know, neat packages called
linux-VERSION.tar.bz2 (for instance).
Have you ever
On 07/12/2007, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But you'd have to agree that user-space utilities like cat and wc are
essentially trivial, in a way that a kernel isn't trivial.
Well, it depends if your considering them all together:
basename cat chgrp chmod chown chroot cksum comm cp csplit cut
Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 07/12/2007, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uh, no. The POSIX (Portable Operating System Interface) specification
specifies at several levels what comprises a UNIX-like API.
Thanks, I am aware of this. I think it a reasonable enough thing for
On 7 Dec 2007 at 14:15, David Kastrup wrote:
Apart from which:
Usage: cat [OPTION] [FILE]...
Concatenate FILE(s), or standard input, to standard output.
-A, --show-all equivalent to -vET
-b, --number-nonblanknumber nonblank output lines
-e
Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 7 Dec 2007 at 14:15, David Kastrup wrote:
Apart from which:
[cat --help]
Which is also not all of trivial when compared to some kernel
functionality. I mean, take the fork system call. Before all that
copy-on-write nonsense was invented, it just
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Dec 7, 2:06 pm, Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 built most of the rest
On Dec 7, 2:01 pm, Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please do that then, there is a reason why these things are
written down, so we do not have to repeat ourselfs. If you still
do not have the answers to your questions after reading those two
or three pages, then it
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 built most of the rest of the
system?
The GNU project deserves credit not only because the GNU project wrote
the GNU
Alfred, quoted above, said that The operating system is called
GNU. That seemed to imply that the kernel is not part of the
operating system (since the Linux kernel is not part of GNU). I
was seeking clarification on that point.
But the Hurd is part of the GNU operating system,
Of course, the proper name for the operating system is GNU and
Linux provides one of it's kernels. The combination of these two
words is GNU/Linux. If you used Sun's kernel you would call the
system GNU/Solarix and if you used the BSD operating system (as
an alternative to GNU)
On Dec 7, 6:23 am, Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Noah Slater wrote:
[...]
less. This is specified and standardised in the POSIX specifications -
which you have clearly not read or even familiarised your self with.
Noah, Noah.
Feel free to familiarised your self with
On Dec 7, 4:29 am, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 10:35:41AM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
[...]
No, Linux is a kernel, you can get all of it in a single tar ball at
On 7 Dec 2007 at 18:30, David Kastrup wrote:
Focus. You seem to confuse this thread with a general bash GNU
thread. Your argument that the boundaries of an operating system are to
be defined by triviality was nonsense. That you don't like cat's
options does not change that at all.
No more
On 07/12/2007, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A recipe for apple pie is not a definition of apples.
I don't see how this makes sense.
Using your analogy, POSIX is a recipe for apple pie and GNU/Linux is a
Bakewells(TM) Apple Pie using GNU Apples for the filling and Linux Mix
for the
On Dec 7, 2:06 pm, Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 built most of the rest of the
system?
The GNU
Alfred M. Szmidt 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 built most of the rest of the
system?
The GNU project deserves credit not only because the
But you'd have to agree that user-space utilities like cat and wc
are essentially trivial, in a way that a kernel isn't trivial.
Well, it depends if your considering them all together:
basename cat chgrp chmod chown chroot cksum comm cp csplit cut
date dd df dir dircolors
Please do that then, there is a reason why these things are
written down, so we do not have to repeat ourselfs. If you still
do not have the answers to your questions after reading those two
or three pages, then it is time to ask questions, but not before.
I can't hope to read
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
Hi!
I guess its time to close after the 75 replies on this matter. I do
not believe we would be able to solve this problem any time soon. Let
him call it by any name he chooses to. Heck, even rms would respect
this freedom of speech.
Regards
Koh Choon Lin
On 07/12/2007, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7 Dec 2007 at 18:30, David Kastrup wrote:
Focus. You seem to confuse this thread with a general bash GNU
thread. Your argument that the boundaries of an operating system are to
be defined by triviality was nonsense. That you don't like
Noah Slater writes:
Your posts are needlessly offencive and antagonistic.
He is a troll. Attempting to antagonize people is all he ever does.
Killfile him.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA
___
gnu-misc-discuss
On 07/12/2007, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pretty strained, but that is the general direction. You are obviously
confused about who and what you try to argue what point with. I am
certainly of the opinion that the name GNU/Linux is appropriate to
apply. But your contention that
On 07/12/2007, Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you ever visited that site, mini-RMS?
Leave the ad hominems at the door please.
Linux is a clone of the operating system Unix, written from scratch
by Linus Torvalds with assistance from a loosely-knit team of hackers
across the
On 07/12/2007, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why is your email address [EMAIL PROTECTED] - it makes replying
to you very annoying.
--
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. Stallman
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmm. So then the goal isn't so much to give credit through names,
which is weird (why through a name? Why should _names_ be how credit
is given?! That certainly _does_ seem odd.), but to make people aware
of the existence and purpose of GNU, the GNU Project,
On 06/12/2007, Keith Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a widely agreed-upon meaning of the phrase operating
system?
Yes, the POSIX specifications layout exactly this definition.
Is the kernel considered part of the operating system?
Very much so, along with a C library, a shell and
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Not again, this debate goes as far back as the kernel itself.
Regards
Koh Choon Lin
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
On 06/12/2007, Koh Choon Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not again, this debate goes as far back as the kernel itself.
Yes, but everyone has been following since then. ;)
--
Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/
Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so
far as society is free to use
Keith Thompson writes:
Is there a widely agreed-upon meaning of the phrase operating system?
No.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
On 06/12/2007, John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No.
I disagree, we have the POSIX specifications to layout exactly what it
means to be an operating system.
--
Noah Slater http://bytesexual.org/
Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so
far as society is free to use the
Noah Slater writes:
I disagree, we have the POSIX specifications to layout exactly what it
means to be an operating system.
We have many official standards. That was not the question.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Elmwood, WI USA
___
On 06/12/2007, John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Noah Slater writes:
I disagree, we have the POSIX specifications to layout exactly what it
means to be an operating system.
We have many official standards. That was not the question.
The original quesion was 'Is there a widely
Noah Slater writes:
The original quesion was 'Is there a widely agreed-upon meaning of the
phrase operating system?'
And a better answer than my original no is Yes, there are several.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Elmwood, WI USA
___
On Dec 6, 2:19 am, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmm. So then the goal isn't so much to give credit through names,
which is weird (why through a name? Why should _names_ be how credit
is given?! That certainly _does_ seem odd.), but to make people
On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 08:17:31PM -0800, Keith Thompson wrote:
Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I do not see the reason why GNU/Linux should be preferred over just
Linux to refer to the system.
[...]
What's the reason, anyway?
The reason is that Linux is not a
How you can claim time and again with a semi-straight face that
you read the pertinent papers when you act all surprised about
their content every time is beyond me.
So then where is it in the papers? I didn't read _every single last
article in existence_, [...]
Please do that
Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think it is enough to feed the trolls with a reference.
I don't think OP was trolling.
The OP is a notorious troll on this group. Trust me, he was trolling.
-Miles
--
x
y
Z!
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 08:17:31PM -0800, Keith Thompson wrote:
Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I do not see the reason why GNU/Linux should be preferred over just
Linux to refer to the system.
[...]
What's the
On Dec 6, 3:17 pm, Alfred M. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How you can claim time and again with a semi-straight face that
you read the pertinent papers when you act all surprised about
their content every time is beyond me.
So then where is it in the papers? I didn't read
On Dec 6, 6:49 pm, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 07/12/2007, mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*Why must the credit be given in the _name_ and not somewhere else?*
Jeez, I see why people call you a troll.
Even though that's not the intention. I just haven't yet
(or maybe I missed
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I do not see the reason why GNU/Linux should be preferred over just
Linux to refer to the system.
[...]
Google for it. The first hit for why gnu/linux should suffice.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
On Dec 5, 6:57 am, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 05/12/2007, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it is enough to feed the trolls with a reference.
I don't think OP was trolling.
Look up his posting history in this group. If
On Dec 5, 4:48 am, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 05/12/2007, mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do not understand why *names* are the
appropriate place to give credit. What's the reason, anyway?
For the same reason that calling an Aston Martin DB9 a Ford VH
platform would be
mike3 wrote:
On Dec 5, 6:57 am, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 05/12/2007, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it is enough to feed the trolls with a reference.
I don't think OP was trolling.
Look up his posting history in this
Why not call it an Aston Martin DB9/Ford VH, then? giggle
Because the brand name will do, just like Ubuntu by it's self.
It seems then there is an alternative (or not?) viewpoint here
Not really, RMS doesn't claim it is for getting credit so I think
you may be confused a little.
So then why
On Dec 5, 8:01 am, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 12:46:00AM -0800, mike3 wrote:
I do not see the reason why GNU/Linux should be preferred over just
Linux to refer to the system.
Hi, you can get *all* of Linux athttp://www.kernel.org/
For a few
So then why insist that the name used commonly _should_ be
GNU/Linux?
Because the operating system being used is the GNU operating system,
with Linux as its kernel.
What about GNU/BSD where you run the GNU stuff with a BSD kernel?
There is a GNU/kFreeBSD system out ther (k for kernel,
On Dec 5, 1:25 pm, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Dec 5, 6:57 am, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 05/12/2007, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it is enough to feed the trolls with a
Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 05/12/2007, mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do not understand why *names* are the
appropriate place to give credit. What's the reason, anyway?
For the same reason [...]
I think it is enough to feed the trolls with a reference. In particular
since it
On 05/12/2007, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it is enough to feed the trolls with a reference.
I don't think OP was trolling.
There is no such system as Solarix, and Sun calls the _complete_
system Solaris with a SunOS kernel.
Yeah, I realised I had got the details wrong
1 - 100 of 110 matches
Mail list logo
