Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on September 20, 2002 01:34 PM
Linux != GNU. The entire GNU system uses Hurd as the kernel. Linux just uses parts of the system (such as libc).
There is only one reason some people refer to Linux as GNU/Linux. RMS was mad about it stealing the thunder from his Hurd system. He started ranting about how everyone should say "GNU/Linux" because most (if not all) Linux distros use various GNU projects. That is true, but they also use projects from XFree86, IJG, Apache, etc. Why should GNU get special treatment?
Some people caved or agreed with him. Most just call it Linux and think Stallman is a jerk or laugh at him.
I have begun to think GNU/RMS is a bane on the free software community (free as in not charging money to use or copy it--not free as in "there can be only one license"). Yes, they wrote quite a few programs and libraries, however what gives them the right to try to dictate what everyone else does.
Would there really be no free compilers, libraries, system utilities written if GNU didn't exist? I doubt it. Maybe some things would be different, but I'm sure many people would have pitched in no matter if the license was GPL, BSD, Artistic or even POV-Ray's.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:GNU
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on September 20, 2002 01:34 PMLinux != GNU. The entire GNU system uses Hurd as the kernel. Linux just uses parts of the system (such as libc).
There is only one reason some people refer to Linux as GNU/Linux. RMS was mad about it stealing the thunder from his Hurd system. He started ranting about how everyone should say "GNU/Linux" because most (if not all) Linux distros use various GNU projects. That is true, but they also use projects from XFree86, IJG, Apache, etc. Why should GNU get special treatment?
Some people caved or agreed with him. Most just call it Linux and think Stallman is a jerk or laugh at him.
I have begun to think GNU/RMS is a bane on the free software community (free as in not charging money to use or copy it--not free as in "there can be only one license"). Yes, they wrote quite a few programs and libraries, however what gives them the right to try to dictate what everyone else does.
Would there really be no free compilers, libraries, system utilities written if GNU didn't exist? I doubt it. Maybe some things would be different, but I'm sure many people would have pitched in no matter if the license was GPL, BSD, Artistic or even POV-Ray's.
#