El 18/11/15 a las 17:39, Ric Moore escribió:
On 11/18/2015 02:24 PM, moxalt wrote:
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as
Linux, is
in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus
Linux.
Depends who's version of the definition of OS you use:
Here's a quote from "The design of the unix operating system", Maurice
J. Bach, Prentice/Hall, 1986, page 4:
The operating system interacts directly with the hardware,
providing common services to programs and insulating them from hardware
idiosyncrasies. Viewing the system as a set of layers, the operating
system is commonly called the system kernel, or just the kernel,
emphasizing its isolation from user programs. Because programs are
independent of the underlying hardware, it is easy to move them between
UNIX systems running on different hardware if the programs do not make
assumptions about the underlying hardware."
http://linux.topology.org/lingl.html
"Personally, I am against re-defining the English language for political
and marketing purposes."
There ya go. Ric
There is a common false justification for calling the operating system
"Linux" instead of "GNU/Linux". Anybody who really thinks that Linux is
an operating system because operating system is synonymous with kernel
must start talking about "The kernel of {FreeBSD, Windows, OS X,
etcetera}" as the operating system as well for otherwise he'd be an
hypocrite in applying his own argument inconsistently instead of
acknowledging his own mistake in that in the modern meaning of
"operating system", Linux is NOT an operating system. The modern word
for that meaning of "operating system" is "kernel".
By the way, according to Debian, GNU/Linux is an OS and Linux is a
kernel. Look at the OS title ("Debian GNU/Linux") and package names.
