On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 16:36 -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote: > Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 16:00 -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote: > > > >> I don't think emulating linux is worthwhile at all, but it seems that if > >> that's what is deisre here, naming it /usr/linux might make more sense. > >> > > > > "Linux" is the name of a kernel. The command environment used by > > Linux distributions is mostly GNU. > > > > Laca > > > A 'Linux Distribution' contains a linux kernel, and alot of software. > Some of which is GNU.
There is not something like THE Linux Distribution, so you could not create something like /usr/linux. If you want to follow this schema you should create something like /usr/rh4, /usr/suse9, /usr/debian3, /usr/myown-nongnubased-linux-distro. We probably do not want this :-). > > It seems that if what developers are looking for is what they find on > linux, and if all the things they find on linux are not always GNU, then > calling it /usr/linux will probably make the most people happy. > > I understand the desire to attract developers. I just can't get used to > putting a bad make-up job on Solaris. > It's my problem I know. > > -Kyle > > -- Marcel Telka
