Re: that old GNU/Linux argument

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> > I actually did not check all the pages, would you mind
> reposting them?
> 
> The links are at the end of this entry in the blong:
> http://fsfla.org/blogs/lxo/2008-07-21-gnu+linux
Those links I saw, I was not sure, that is why I asked for them again.
Thank you for posting them :)
> 
> > I am a happy Linux User and it is definitely
> impossible to please
> > everyone out there as for a proper name that pleases
> everyone.
> 
> Fortunately, you don't have to please everyone.
> 
> You can decide to privilege some while insulting others, or
> use the
> name that one major author begs for and the other
> doesn't object to.
> 
> Why would you choose to insult us and bring us harm, when
> the
> alternative won't bring harm to anyone and most people
> don't care one
> way or another?
I am not insulting anyone and if I did, I apologize, I have asked some basic questions about why?  If I am not mistaken, RMS wants it be called GNU/Linux to honor the work done by GNU and there is no doubt that they deserve all the credit!  What many people here are against is that there are other projects that have contributed as well and have done a great deal too, without asking for their name be attached to ????/Linux.  

A person posted the following at http://Distrowatch.com about the question what is Linux?  What about closed source drivers in Linux?

\quote
Please see: http://www.linuxmark.org/

Linux is the kernel ONLY
All else are add-ons to actually be capable of doing things
(E.G. from small stand_alone utilities to huge Apps)

What you generically called "linux" is in fact, varied distributions
of O/Systems -
~ Bundled as a package, encompassing some release of the (often modified) basic Linux kernel

Irregardless of R.Stallman's opinions & many wonderful FSW contributions:
"Gnu" is but one portion of all

By "closed source" if you mean proprietary code;
All is dependent on filling licensing requirements

The GNU philosophy is ~ to use no proprietary code whatsoever
( arguably impractical if a needed driver is closed source)

After how many years, the *HURD* kernel project is still incomplete
http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/

To satisfy any queries such as those - It may be better to source
"official" original sites of Ea.

An interesting (VERY lengthy) read:

http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Torvalds/summing_up.shtml#Linux_as_a_accidental_creator_of_a_new_bios

Contrary to his unfortunate quote: Mr. Torvalds has never had aspirations to be a "god"

At present, the FOSS movement is so vast > NO single person would be capable of
maintaining any but some *portion* of the kernel aspects

Thankfully we all benefit from talented coders & feedback from ALL users

This recent quote may summarise all:

"Linux is moving away from its founding ideals and not even Linus Torvalds can change it"
/quote


Regards,

Antonio 




      

-- 
fedora-list mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux