On Jan 16, 1:17 pm, mike3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 14, 6:32 pm, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > nicolas vigier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On 2008-01-03, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> What he asks is for people to not call the whole operating system as > > >> Linux, which is a common mistake as 99.999% of the time people are > > >> talking about a GNU variant to which was added the Linux kernel. > > > > This not a mistake, this is just a name. And a name doesn't have to > > > reflect all the things which are included inside it. Most people seems > > > to like the "Linux distribution" name, everybody understands that it > > > means the Linux kernel and many other things, > > > But those many other things are not arbitrary. You dont' let yourself > > be rechristened by your tailor, even though you are not fit for running > > around naked, do you? > > > > and I see no reason to change that name to something else that is not > > > as easy to say just because RPMS decides so. > > > Uh, GNU was there first. So why should people decide to rename it when > > it was done in the compass of a different project? > > That's right, the majority component of the system is GNU. > So then it seems only to make sense that GNU should be > in the name. > > > Why is it ok to > > bereave the GNU project of the credit for its work? > > Credit can be given in other places beside _names_. > The idea it must be given in the name and in no other > place doesn't really make much sense. >
Oof, that's not quite right. The idea is that it must be given in the name, no other place is an acceptable _substitute_ for giving it in the name (as if it was, there's nothing wrong in terms of credit with calling the system "Linux".). _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
