> > Alexandre Oliva wrote: > Err... I don't know how you got this idea that GNU was > supposed to be just a kernel. GNU is an entire operating system, that > Linux developers happened to borrow to complete theirs, because > all they had was a kernel. >
This part can be argued. If there was no kernel, the GNU operating system would not have gone anywhere :(, and without the GNU tools, where would Linux be? But what ifs do not matter. What matters is where we are at the present. On the following link is a page which explains many strong points against the naming arguments http://www.topology.org/linux/lingl.html I have also found a page in which it clearly explains some problems with the GPL <quote from http://www.topology.org/linux/gpl.html> An analogy for the GPL would be the farmer who receives the gift of a GPL cow from a neighbour. The cow is completely free, but all of the milk from the cow must be given away for free, and all of the cow's calves, and the calves' calves, yea, even unto the thousandth generation, shall be given away for free. Now what kind of use is such a cow? Even if the bulls are non-GPL bulls, all of their offspring by GPL cows are controlled by the GPL licence. If you have a cow breeding programme and you develop a really excellent breed of cow, you must give the new breed of cows away for free if just one of the many ancestors of the superior cow was a GPL cow. The GPL cow is even more dangerous than patented GM crop seeds. The world envisioned by the GPL seems to be a perfect communism where all developers are like subsistence farmers; they must give away everything excess to their own immediate requirements for free to the community. </quote> This is quite interesting and the points are very well stated. I know that this will not change peoples minds, but it will make them aware of the other side of the story. Regards, Antonio -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
