[ILUG-BOM] A Linux Brochure

Philip Tellis philip.tellis@[EMAIL-PROTECTED]
Wed Jan 3 16:01:35 IST 2007


Sometime Today, kM cobbled together some glyphs to say:

> 1. fact is fact.  gnu is the base and linux is the kernel so gnulinux
> should not offend any one.  what's wrong in calling both the names

while this was the case when linux started out, it is no longer the 
case.  each distribution is an operating system in itself, and most of 
them do not resemble the original [intended] GNU system very much.  Most 
distros come pre-bundled with non-free software, which means that they 
are definitely not GNU/Linux systems.

> 3.  gnulinux gives the perfect picture of total transperency and freedom.
> it means "gnu operating system useing the linux kernel".  so we value

As far as I know (and I don't know everything), Debian GNU/Linux is the 
only GNU operating system using the linux kernel.  I'm sure it's 
possible to come up with your own such OS using Gentoo or LFS, but most 
other pre-bundled linux kernel based operating systems have different 
names (eg: Fedora Core Linux, Redhat Enterprise Linux).

> system?  and if linux is the kernel is it not the duty of every one to
> mention the name of the operating system (and the tool chain ) along

The tool chain and whether it is indispensable or not is really 
irrelevant.  The operating system and kernel may be relevant, but when 
we talk about Free operating systems, we aren't dealing with the single 
GNU Free operating system.  There are many more today, all of which we 
push, and most of which aren't GNU.

Using the GNU/ to imply freedom is a noble cause, and well worth it, but 
is it right to use the GNU/ prefix to sell an OS that isn't completely 
Free?

-- 
Use the "telephone test" for readability.
             - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plaugher)



More information about the Linuxers mailing list