Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
GNU/Linux or Linux alone?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  

GNU/Linux or Linux alone?
GNU/Linux
42%
 42%  [ 191 ]
Linux
35%
 35%  [ 158 ]
Don't Care
22%
 22%  [ 101 ]
Total Votes : 450

Author Message
Thalion
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Sep 2003
Posts: 71
Location: not in the USA

PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 6:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Irom wrote:
Stallman's goal was to write a complete OS. People took all his work + Linux (the kernel) and called it "Linux".


Take it another way around. Stallmans's goal was to write a complete OS. So he took other's work (Linux) and called it GNU/Linux. By the way, at one point it was "Lignux" - can you imagine such a monstrocity?

Quote:
1. It's not fair. Without the GNU OS, you couldn't even use Linux (the kernel).


Not true. There are alternative userland base tools out there.

Quote:
because GNU normally does not get mentioned the philosophy behind GNU gets no attention.


And why should it? You know, not everyone in Open Source camp likes FSF views. Linus, for one, doesn't.

Quote:
Also, it makes Stallman look like an idiot/zealot when he asks people to say GNU/Linux just because of "a few tools in the Linux OS".


Well... if it makes him look like one, then perhaps he should just stop asking? Or live with it...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Athas
Guru
Guru


Joined: 04 Sep 2003
Posts: 394
Location: Brøndby, Denmark

PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 7:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thalion wrote:
When you've got a strictly base system with GNU tools (by the way, there are alternatives!), I would say it's okay to call it GNU/Linux, although I'd still just call it Linux for the sake of simplicity.


I don't want to troll, but is there a complete set of GNU replacement tools for the Linux kernel? You could probably port the BSD utils, but has it been done?

Quote:

Take it another way around. Stallmans's goal was to write a complete OS. So he took other's work (Linux) and called it GNU/Linux.


No, to begin with, the FSF didn't think much of Linux, which is why the name 'Linux' got a headstart. The FSF had nothing to do with the creation of GNU/Linux apart from the addition of a number of critical programs.
_________________
Emacs-optimized danish console keymap - My .emacs
Climacs - next generation Emacs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Irom
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 07 Oct 2003
Posts: 90
Location: am arsch..

PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 9:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thalion wrote:
Irom wrote:
Stallman's goal was to write a complete OS. People took all his work + Linux (the kernel) and called it "Linux".


Take it another way around. Stallmans's goal was to write a complete OS. So he took other's work (Linux) and called it GNU/Linux. By the way, at one point it was "Lignux" - can you imagine such a monstrocity?

But it isn't another way around. Stallman was first (1984) and to this time, i think, not even the BSDs were free.
Stallman started it. And others took his work. Stallman had his own kernel and didn't know about Linux when it was first combined with GNU (which was complete except for the kernel).
But I have to agree, "LiGNUx" sucks. ;)

Also, the kernel is not the most important part of an OS. Nobody except geeks care about the kernel.

For example, how would you define Microsoft Windows as an OS? The Kernel? No, it's the start-menu, the ugly blue Titlebars, the Explorer!
Has the Windows-Kernel even a name?!

For most people the important part of the OS is the interface.

Thalion wrote:
Irom wrote:

1. It's not fair. Without the GNU OS, you couldn't even use Linux (the kernel).


Not true. There are alternative userland base tools out there.

init, bash, ls, sed, awk, wget, ...
And don't forget who gave us the GPL in the first place.

Thalion wrote:
Irom wrote:
because GNU normally does not get mentioned the philosophy behind GNU gets no attention.


And why should it? You know, not everyone in Open Source camp likes FSF views. Linus, for one, doesn't.

Maybe you don't agree, and that's ok. But many people don't get a chance to agree, because the don't know about the GNU philosopie.

Thalion wrote:
Irom wrote:
Also, it makes Stallman look like an idiot/zealot when he asks people to say GNU/Linux just because of "a few tools in the Linux OS".


Well... if it makes him look like one, then perhaps he should just stop asking? Or live with it...

His goal is to replace all non-free software in the world with free software. He can't do this alone, so he has to make his idea known.
_________________
http://ftp.fukt.bsnet.se/pub/movies/stallman/ (Please watch this before you form an opinion about GNU)
http://apfelboymchen.net/gnu/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thalion
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Sep 2003
Posts: 71
Location: not in the USA

PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Athas wrote:
I don't want to troll, but is there a complete set of GNU replacement tools for the Linux kernel? You could probably port the BSD utils, but has it been done?


It depends upon what you say is a base system. For instance, BusyBox can replace most GNU binutils and fileutils. I'm not sure about glibc, though.

Quote:
No, to begin with, the FSF didn't think much of Linux, which is why the name 'Linux' got a headstart. The FSF had nothing to do with the creation of GNU/Linux apart from the addition of a number of critical programs.


If you say yourself that FSF didn't have anything to do with creation of "GNU/Linux", then why "GNU" there in the first place? =)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thalion
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Sep 2003
Posts: 71
Location: not in the USA

PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Irom wrote:
Stallman was first (1984) and to this time, i think, not even the BSDs were free.


First at what? He did have the environment, right. He didn't have an OS.

Quote:
Stallman started it. And others took his work. Stallman had his own kernel and didn't know about Linux when it was first combined with GNU (which was complete except for the kernel).


If you mean the Mach kernel which is used by GNU/Hurd, then it's not Stallman's kernel:

"Project Mach was an operating systems research project of the Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science from 1985 to 1994."

Quote:
Also, the kernel is not the most important part of an OS. Nobody except geeks care about the kernel.


From this point of view, I'd have to say that the most important part of an OS is KDE/Gnome/whatever. Nobody except geeks care about things like bash and grep, after all =)

Quote:
For example, how would you define Microsoft Windows as an OS? The Kernel? No, it's the start-menu, the ugly blue Titlebars, the Explorer!


So, if you run explorer.exe under WINE (and use DLLs from WINE project), it'll still be Windows?

And how about XPDE?

Quote:
Has the Windows-Kernel even a name?!


Yes. It's called "Windows NT kernel". Just like Linux kernel is called "Linux kernel".

Quote:
init, bash, ls, sed, awk, wget, ...


See *BSD.

Quote:
And don't forget who gave us the GPL in the first place.


It should be Stalinux then =) Wait... this doesn't sound very nice. Oh well.

Quote:
Maybe you don't agree, and that's ok. But many people don't get a chance to agree, because the don't know about the GNU philosopie.


Go ahead. Preach the word. Tell people. There's no need to rename something to do that.

Thalion wrote:
His goal is to replace all non-free software in the world with free software. He can't do this alone, so he has to make his idea known.


So go ahead and help him. Just don't conscript unwilling people into that army of yours.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Athas
Guru
Guru


Joined: 04 Sep 2003
Posts: 394
Location: Brøndby, Denmark

PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thalion wrote:
If you say yourself that FSF didn't have anything to do with creation of "GNU/Linux", then why "GNU" there in the first place? =)


Because the GNU tools are being affiliated with values (namely, those of the Open Source community) that are not completely compatible with the beliefs of the FSF. I thought that much was clear by now.

Thalion wrote:
From this point of view, I'd have to say that the most important part of an OS is KDE/Gnome/whatever. Nobody except geeks care about things like bash and grep, after all =)


You care about your environment. I don't use KDE, GNOME, XFCE, etc., I use zsh, grep, Emacs, etc., so that is what constitutes the operating system for me if we have to define it by the environment.

Thalion wrote:
So, if you run explorer.exe under WINE (and use DLLs from WINE project), it'll still be Windows?


No, because "Windows" would be running inside a host environment.
_________________
Emacs-optimized danish console keymap - My .emacs
Climacs - next generation Emacs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Irom
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 07 Oct 2003
Posts: 90
Location: am arsch..

PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Stallman was first (1984) and to this time, i think, not even the BSDs were free.

Quote:
First at what? He did have the environment, right. He didn't have an OS.

Neither did Linus. And if there wasn't a GNU environment Linus wouldn't have much fun with his kernel. Well, the sources of his kernel, he wouldn't even be able to compile them.
So, both are important contributions, but the main part (a complete UNIX-environment!) was GNU, and it was first. In GNU/Linux both parts get mentioned.

Without GNU there wouldn't be a "Linux OS" today. But without Linux, maybe they would have had enough manpower to finish their own kernel.

Quote:
Stallman started it. And others took his work. Stallman had his own kernel and didn't know about Linux when it was first combined with GNU (which was complete except for the kernel).
If you mean the Mach kernel which is used by GNU/Hurd, then it's not Stallman's kernel:

It's the official GNU kernel to form a free OS.

Look at your link. Mach was incorporated in many Operating Systems. Is one of them named "Mach" (like it happend with Linux)?
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/project/mach/public/www/overview.html
One of them has Mach in his name.

It's the GNU project which programs on HURD sind 1990. It's not that they just took Mach and had a kernel.
But people took a complete UNIX environment (and that's much) to use Linux!


Quote:
Also, the kernel is not the most important part of an OS. Nobody except geeks care about the kernel.

Quote:

From this point of view, I'd have to say that the most important part of an OS is KDE/Gnome/whatever. Nobody except geeks care about things like bash and grep, after all =)

Today. But not in 1984.
Don't get me wrong, I agree that the kernel *is* important. But the point of this example was to show that an OS isn't just the kernel, and none is named after the kernel!
Aditionally, when Linux (the kernel) came out, GNU *was* an complete environment and others except geeks cared about things like bash and grep.
And for servers bash *is* the interface.

Quote:
For example, how would you define Microsoft Windows as an OS? The Kernel? No, it's the start-menu, the ugly blue Titlebars, the Explorer!
Quote:

So, if you run explorer.exe under WINE (and use DLLs from WINE project), it'll still be Windows?

And how about XPDE?

As I said, the example was to show that the kernel is not the most important part which you name your OS after.

Quote:
Has the Windows-Kernel even a name?!
Quote:

Yes. It's called "Windows NT kernel". Just like Linux kernel is called "Linux kernel".

Yeah, that's my point. In windows the kernel is named after the operating system, in "Linux" the OS is named after the kernel.

Quote:
init, bash, ls, sed, awk, wget, ...
Quote:

See *BSD.

I don't know what you mean. The *BSDs weren't free at this time. Also, try a BSD out! The first thing *I* did was to install bash. It's too early to judge about the BSD environment because I only installed it recently on a second machine, but my first impresson was: "Uugh, what's that?".

Quote:
And don't forget who gave us the GPL in the first place.
It should be Stalinux then =) Wait... this doesn't sound very nice. Oh well.

No, it should be GNU/Linux to emphasize the origin and political sources of a very big part of your "Linux Operating System".

Quote:
Quote:
Maybe you don't agree, and that's ok. But many people don't get a chance to agree, because the don't know about the GNU philosopie.

Go ahead. Preach the word. Tell people. There's no need to rename something to do that.

Unfortunately, there is a need. I tried to explain It: it's bad for the goals of the FSF.

Quote:
Quote:
His goal is to replace all non-free software in the world with free software. He can't do this alone, so he has to make his idea known.

So go ahead and help him. Just don't conscript unwilling people into that army of yours.

Did I? I thought we had a normal discussion about the topic of this thread? I tried to explain my opinion and not to be a zealot. Maybe because English is not my mother tounge. I have a hard time writing all this. ;)
If you mean Stallman - he doesn't force anyone. But he tries to spread his idea, which i think is OK.
_________________
http://ftp.fukt.bsnet.se/pub/movies/stallman/ (Please watch this before you form an opinion about GNU)
http://apfelboymchen.net/gnu/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pratttech
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 09 Sep 2004
Posts: 89
Location: Attleboro, Massachusetts, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 9:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To the unitiated I run Linux, but to anyone who's saavy enough to know that Linux is a kernel, is also grown up enough to know that my distro is Gentoo and Gnus not Unix (or Linux, for that matter) ;)

Stallman is a good dude. A little eccentric and overzealous maybe, but the ideals of the FSF are noble. He might have been a potential Bill Gates, but took the high road because he feels that our freedom is at stake. Look how many machines run FSF code. There are no restrictions and he has not gotten wealthy from any of his efforts. Many other companies profit greatly from the FSF and its Open Source progeny. I don't understand much of the recalcitrance I have seen in this thread. All the FSF asks is that credit be given where credit is due-- isn't this the heart of the GPL?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
codergeek42
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 5142
Location: Anaheim, CA (USA)

PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pratttech wrote:
All the FSF asks is that credit be given where credit is due-- isn't this the heart of the GPL?
Well said.
/me claps.
_________________
~~ Peter: Brony, GNU/Linux geek, caffeine addict, and Free Software advocate.
Who am I? :: EFF & FSF
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
frippz
Guru
Guru


Joined: 22 Aug 2002
Posts: 460
Location: Malmö, Sweden

PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Athas wrote:
The FSF isn't trying to force anyone into doing anything: Gentoo is Gentoo and Mandrake is Mandrake, it's the concept of the combination of the Linux kernel and GNU tools that should be called GNU/Linux.

Sorry, my fever must be running really high now. The word "force" is totally misplaced here. Not to mention the misqoutation in general.

Bah, I give up... I'll be back once the fever has gone down... :oops:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thalion
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Sep 2003
Posts: 71
Location: not in the USA

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 2:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think one major misunderstanding on behalf of FSF (it might be deliberate, but I'm not sure) and its followers is that product's name is not a place for "giving credits where credits are due".

"Linux" was and is a name of a certain bundle of software, providing some specific functions. It is true that the said bundle included the kernel written by Linus, and base utilities provided by GNU. And, of course, everyone who contributed - including FSF - should have been credited, and they were credited; that's what those AUTHORS and CREDITS files are for. However, a product's name is an entirely different story. Obviously, "Linux" refers to Linus. However, it is not a credit. It's just a name. Just like when Klaus Knopper makes a Debian-based Linux distro of his own and calls it Knoppix. Of course, Linus and FSF and Debian are properly credited in the documentation, so everyone is happy. There is no need for something like "GNU/Linux/Knoppix". On the other hand, when Debian made their distro, they called it "Debian GNU/Linux" - fine, it's theirs, and so is the choice of name, as long as everyone's properly credited.

Same thing should apply to Linux in general. It was called "Linux" before Stallman started his renaming campaign, and it is still called simply "Linux" by majority of users. It's not a slogan, it's not a place to "give credits", and it's definitely not an ad board for GNU propaganda. It's just a common, established name for a certain piece of software, and it does not bear any connotations. Let it remain such.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pratttech
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 09 Sep 2004
Posts: 89
Location: Attleboro, Massachusetts, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thalion wrote:
I think one major misunderstanding on behalf of FSF (it might be deliberate, but I'm not sure) and its followers is that product's name is not a place for "giving credits where credits are due".


You focus on a closing statement with issues of semantics yet you missed my own stated main point completely...

pratttech wrote:
To the unitiated I run Linux, but to anyone who's saavy enough to know that Linux is a kernel, is also grown up enough to know that my distro is Gentoo and Gnus not Unix (or Linux, for that matter) ;)


Obviously you speak from your nether regions out of habit and can not yield an inch to a man who has probably given more of his life to the Open Source movement than you or I ever will.

I apologize if I unintentionally continued any argument you feel compelled to carry on Thalion. My intention was not to prolong an argument but to simply voice my opinion in this VOTE THREAD.

You have stated your own-- many times over already. :twisted:

PLEASE PLEASE give it a rest already. This is a vote thread. Vote, say your peace-- then LET OTHERS DO THE SAME.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Duck-Billed Platypus
Guru
Guru


Joined: 30 Jun 2003
Posts: 576
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States of America

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whatever you want to call it.. so long as we all understand.. I call it linux cause its shorter/easier/etc
_________________
Dentists are evil.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thalion
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Sep 2003
Posts: 71
Location: not in the USA

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 4:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just side with Linus on that one:

"Umm, this discussion has gone on quite long enough, thank you very much. It doesn't really matter what people call Linux, as long as credit is given where credit is due (on both sides). Personally, I'll very much continue to call it "Linux"."

:wink:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Athas
Guru
Guru


Joined: 04 Sep 2003
Posts: 394
Location: Brøndby, Denmark

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 7:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thalion wrote:
Same thing should apply to Linux in general. It was called "Linux" before Stallman started his renaming campaign, and it is still called simply "Linux" by majority of users.


If Stallman had know the GNU/Linux operating system would become such a succes, he would have started the branding campaign far earlier.

Quote:
I think one major misunderstanding on behalf of FSF (it might be deliberate, but I'm not sure) and its followers is that product's name is not a place for "giving credits where credits are due".


And you again don't understand that the problem isn't about credit, it's about being visible. The FSF couldn't care less for the technical prestige, but their software is being associated with the philosophy of Linux, not GNU, which is bad.
_________________
Emacs-optimized danish console keymap - My .emacs
Climacs - next generation Emacs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Skraut
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 23 Feb 2003
Posts: 142
Location: Norwalk, OH, USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way, Virgo Supercluster, Known Universe

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is the problem...

Linux.org
Linux.com
Red Hat Enterprise Linux
SUSE Linux
Mandrake Linux
The Linux Kernel Archives
Gentoo Linux
Slackware Linux
The Linux Documentation Project
Linux Today
Linux Gazette
The Linux Portal
Just Linux
LinuxISO
Linux Magazine
Linux Planet
Linux World
Linux Central

Not a GNU anywhere in the herd (pardon the pun)

It's like calling a facial tissue a Kleenex, or a Copy a Xerox. Is it right; no. But in a lot of ways the "Cat is out of the bag" so to speak. Despite what it should be called, The name Linux is here to stay.

Btw, in the first 3 pages of links for Linux when searched on Google, only 2 included GNU/Linux:
Debian GNU/Linux
Distrowatch
_________________
__
If you play a Windows CD backwards you can hear demonic voices... Played forward it does something even more terrifying... It installs Windows.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ruzbeh
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 223

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 1:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thalion wrote:
Ruzbeh wrote:
Officially it's GNU/Linux, sure, but I prefer to say Linux.


There is no such thing as an "official" name for Linux. It's just a matter of personal preference and/or political views.

IMO, the best approach is to call a distro the way distromaker call it. So it'd be Gentoo Linux, RedHat Linux, Mandrake Linux, but Debian GNU/Linux. When you've got a strictly base system with GNU tools (by the way, there are alternatives!), I would say it's okay to call it GNU/Linux, although I'd still just call it Linux for the sake of simplicity.


Ok, after seeing Revolution OS, I totally correct myself. It should be just Linux, only the important people need to realise that GNU, the FSF and Richard Stallman played a big role in Linux. Though it would be nice if websites and stuff stop writing that Linus Torvalds created an OS all by himself, not because it would give him too much credit, but because it's just not true.

And on top of that, GNU/Linux is a mouthful and sounds kinda weird. :lol:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nighty
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 10 Aug 2003
Posts: 217
Location: right behind you.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 2:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mentioning the word linux alone makes you sound like a complete geek. actually saying gnu linux makes people want to hurl rigid objects at you. :lol:

cmon its obvious that gnu plays a big role. but the name doesnt sell.
so its not wise to shove it anywhere. besides every os uses gnu stuff today since you can find gcc qt and gtk in most modern OSs. i dont see anyone using freebsd saying that he runs gnu/kde :P and also many linux distros use the software that uses the mozilla license and the bsd license. so in my opinion its abit out of proportions.
i suggest keeping mention of gnu in the license is enough since in no way will it harm the connection between linux and the opensource community.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3327

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Skraut wrote:
It's like calling a facial tissue a Kleenex, or a Copy a Xerox.


You call tissues "kleenexs"? And photocopies "xerox's"? You're weird!!!! :?
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi

Cold is gods way to tell us to burn more Catholics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
curtis119
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 10 Mar 2003
Posts: 2159
Location: Toledo, OH, USA, North America, Earth, SOL System, Milky Way, The Universe, The Cosmos, and Beyond.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 4:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cokehabit wrote:
Skraut wrote:
It's like calling a facial tissue a Kleenex, or a Copy a Xerox.


You call tissues "kleenexs"? And photocopies "xerox's"? You're weird!!!! :?


Some do. Kleenex is the Top brand of tissue and Xerox, well you know that one.
_________________
Please read the Forum Guidelines.
* | www.gayroughnecks.com | *
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
chunderbunny
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 31 May 2004
Posts: 1281
Location: 51°24'27" N, 0°57'15" W

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 4:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You don't really hear much about Xerox in the UK. I've worked ina few offices and I've never seen a Xerox machine.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pratttech
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 09 Sep 2004
Posts: 89
Location: Attleboro, Massachusetts, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 4:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

:lol: Seem to have come in off-thread what with the nose-blowing and mimeographing ;)

I was :? confused by your post Ruzbeh.

Ruzbeh wrote:

Ok, after seeing Revolution OS, I totally correct myself.

Why does this film make you think only some people should know the truth?
Ruzbeh wrote:

It should be just Linux, only the important people need to realise that GNU, the FSF and Richard Stallman played a big role in Linux.

Who are they?
Ruzbeh wrote:

Though it would be nice if websites and stuff stop writing that Linus Torvalds created an OS all by himself, not because it would give him too much credit, but because it's just not true.

Agreed.
Ruzbeh wrote:

And on top of that, GNU/Linux is a mouthful and sounds kinda weird. :lol:

Does New York sound wierd to you? How about York?


:idea: I just love the irony that New linux really is old GNU and that Linux only ever exists but in the heart of our OS (and this debate it seems).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3327

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 5:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

curtis119 wrote:
cokehabit wrote:
Skraut wrote:
It's like calling a facial tissue a Kleenex, or a Copy a Xerox.


You call tissues "kleenexs"? And photocopies "xerox's"? You're weird!!!! :?


Some do. Kleenex is the Top brand of tissue and Xerox, well you know that one.


as far as i know, the only thing Xerox has ever done is create the firse gui. I know they did photocopiers though but you never see them...
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi

Cold is gods way to tell us to burn more Catholics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Slyde
Guru
Guru


Joined: 14 Jul 2003
Posts: 314

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 5:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My friends do not know what Linux is, let alone 'GNU Linux', so the prefix is useless. And my friends that do know what Linux is, know it is GNU so it is basically pointless.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deranger
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 1215

PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In my opinion, when talking about distros in general, it's GNU/Linux. Like "Yeah, I'm using GNU/Linux because it's more secure and stable than Windows", but i prefer using distribution's official name, like "Debian GNU/Linux" or "Gentoo Linux"

And Linux when talking to somebody who doesn't undestand anything about open source, GNU or Linux ;)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 3 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum