On Tuesday 29 July 2008 17:28, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2008, Marko Vojinovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In the following paragraphs of that post, I used it to draw a silent
> > parallel to the whole Linux vs GNU/Linux discussion.
>
> FWIW, classical/information doesn't make for such
> In as much as you help the other side by adopting an unfair
> name, it
> is indeed in part your fault. You've become an
> accomplice of this
> unfairness.
Okay, they are the ones who are wrong, but they are not free as you have
pointed out. Maybe it is okay to call the projects Linux because t
On Jul 28, 2008, Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > RMS is the one requesting this
>> I am. He's not here. He's not even aware I'm doing this here.
> But you are under his jurisdiction, He is the leader of the FSF/GNU.
> He is obviously in command.
He may very well be in command
On Jul 28, 2008, Marko Vojinovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In the following paragraphs of that post, I used it to draw a silent
> parallel to the whole Linux vs GNU/Linux discussion.
FWIW, classical/information doesn't make for such a parallel. It's
not the classical on top of the informatio
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
GNU is a radical political movement. Putting the name next to
Linux makes it seem as though Linus himself endorses the movement.
But that's rather dishonest, given that Linus has always stayed
away from such political zealotry.
So I added a +1) and sent it in.
So i
On Monday 28 July 2008 19:06, Antonio Olivares wrote:
> > Hey, how about me starting a quest here? :-)
> >
> > When you say "information" above, you actually
> > mean "classical information",
> > as opposed to quantum information, which does not possess
> > the property of
> > copying (this famous
On Jul 29, 2008, Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you ever come to the US close to the border with Mexico,
I went to San Diego some 9 years ago, to speak at a Usenix
conference. Is that the location you're speaking of?
> I would invite to a couple of beers :)
I'd pass the beer,
On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 14:05 +, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> Come on folks, what do you say? Is anyone willing to co-found a non-profit
> organization with me for this cause? I apel on your morality, ethics and a
> feeling on what is the Right Thing here.
Just use your quantum intentionality and
> >> > personal attack because we do not agree with
> your purist ways.
> >>
> >> Purist? Who's the one denying that it's
> not a combination of GNU
> >> with Linux, but rather pure Linux? :-)
>
> > I did not say pure Linux. You are putting words* that
> I did not write here.
>
> Note the :-)
On Mon July 28 2008 3:34:28 pm Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> Although you seem to remember quite well the date, you don't seem to
> remember the content.
>
> For your convenience:
>
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2008-July/msg01977.html
>
> Now I may be obtuse since english is not
On Jul 28, 2008, Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You had been quiet for all these years :)
Mostly, indeed.
> What triggered the awakening of a sleeping GNU/Linux GIANT?
I had been involved in the conversations about the Free Software
Distribution Guidelines on both capacities as F
On Jul 28, 2008, Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > personal attack because we do not agree with your purist ways.
>>
>> Purist? Who's the one denying that it's not a combination of GNU
>> with Linux, but rather pure Linux? :-)
> I did not say pure Linux. You are putting words* t
> > personal attack because we do not agree with your
> purist ways.
>
> Purist? Who's the one denying that it's not a
> combination of GNU with
> Linux, but rather pure Linux? :-)
>
> --
I am not denying that it is GNU/Linux, I am only resenting that name be forced
when I simply know the sys
On Jul 28, 2008, Marko Vojinovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 28 July 2008 16:56, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> And it's not GNU utilities. It's an operating system. If it was just
>> "the GNU utilities", you might be right.
> GNU is *not* an operating system. An operating system must hav
> > Mr. Stallman posted to this list on the 17th,
>
> He followed up on an e-mail sent directly to him, copying
> every other
> recipient of the message in his response. What does this
> prove?
>
> > I've been a member of this list for five years,
> yet, I wouldn't be
> > surprised if you have e
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ uname -o
> > GNU/Linux
>
> > That should be enough.
>
> Enough for what?
To send this thread to where it belong ==> /dev/null. Is it not that what you
want? or do you still want more than that? It is hard coded into the system
==> GNU/Linux. But you have confirmed
On Jul 28, 2008, Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> personal attack because we do not agree with your purist ways.
Purist? Who's the one denying that it's not a combination of GNU with
Linux, but rather pure Linux? :-)
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
On Jul 28, 2008, Claude Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mr. Stallman posted to this list on the 17th,
He followed up on an e-mail sent directly to him, copying every other
recipient of the message in his response. What does this prove?
> I've been a member of this list for five years, yet, I
On Jul 28, 2008, Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ uname -o
> GNU/Linux
> That should be enough.
Enough for what?
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Software Evangelist [EMAIL PROTECTED], gnu.org}
FSFLA Board Member ¡Sé
On Jul 28, 2008, Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > You know I really don't care what you call it, but
>> I do care that you are
>> > systematically driving people away from free software.
>>
>> Away from Free Software or away from Fedora and Linux, that
>
On Monday 28 July 2008 16:56, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> And it's not GNU utilities. It's an operating system. If it was just
> "the GNU utilities", you might be right.
GNU is *not* an operating system. An operating system must have a kernel as
its part. GNU does not, so it is not an operating sy
> Guess what the following line means for you. For me it
> means bliss :)
Whatever that is. I do not know.
>
> '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' => 14,
>
> Rui
>
> --
Rui, Alexandre, et. all.
If I insulted any of you, I am sorry, but not that I concede defeat or accept
your triumph.
Name calling
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 01:21:30PM -0700, Antonio Olivares wrote:
> Do not decide for anyone! They should make the call. If they
> decide to respond to something I or anybody else commented, it is
> their call not yours. Or are you a puppet?
> Your arguments are religious as well, and who is
> > > I too am beginning to chafe. You have not only
> become
> > > tiresome,
> > > but, you are also not entirely credible; Mr.
> Stallman
> > > posted to
> > > this list on the 17th, conveniently starting a
> new thread
> > > which
> > > to all appearance was in response to this endless
> > >
> > > Actually, that's the BSD maintainers's
> choice,
> > > dictated by irrational hate[1]
> > > of the GNU GPL.
> > >
> > > [1] at least from some, extremely rude and
> hypocrit, folks.
> > >
> > > Now, I join other calls to stop this endless
> discussion.
> > > Les Mikesell or
> > > Antonio Ol
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 12:35:24PM -0700, Antonio Olivares wrote:
> --- On Mon, 7/28/08, Claude Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > From: Claude Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > I too am beginning to chafe. You have not only become
> > tiresome,
> > but, you are also not entirely credible; M
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 12:33:12PM -0700, Antonio Olivares wrote:
> > From: Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: that old GNU/Linux argument
> > To: "For users of Fedora"
> > Date: Monday, July 28, 2008, 12:25 PM
> > On Mon,
On Mon July 28 2008 3:34:28 pm Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> I'd even wager that the mailing list moderator approved his
> post and that he's not really subscribed to fedora-list (I
> doubt he would care about Fedora that much).
>
> So, no stirring things up, no puppet mastering no "evil"
> mast
--- On Mon, 7/28/08, Claude Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Claude Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: that old GNU/Linux argument
> To: "For users of Fedora"
> Date: Monday, July 28, 2008, 12:19 PM
> On Mon July 28 2008 12:56:17 pm Alexan
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 03:19:22PM -0400, Claude Jones wrote:
> On Mon July 28 2008 12:56:17 pm Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> On Jul 28, 2008, Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >> RMS is the one requesting this
> > I am. He's not here. He's not even aware I'm doing this
> > here.
>
> From: Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: that old GNU/Linux argument
> To: "For users of Fedora"
> Date: Monday, July 28, 2008, 12:25 PM
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 01:41:36PM -0500, Les Mikesell
> wrote:
> > Antonio Olivares wro
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 01:41:36PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Antonio Olivares wrote:
>> But GNU utilities exist in *BSD camps as well, and the name GNU/*BSD is
>> not used or required. A page explains that since Linux Distributions
>> are more popular than *BSD distributions, it makes much mo
Antonio Olivares wrote:
The right thing for me to do is to {sHuT ThE HeLl up}* as many people are ***very pissed off***, It is hard for me to do that * because I really enjoy reading the comments by all the members who have posted. I would like to remain on the sidelines and come in to the field
On Mon July 28 2008 12:56:17 pm Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jul 28, 2008, Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> RMS is the one requesting this
> I am. He's not here. He's not even aware I'm doing this
> here.
I too am beginning to chafe. You have not only become tiresome,
but, you ar
> Hey, how about me starting a quest here? :-)
>
> When you say "information" above, you actually
> mean "classical information",
> as opposed to quantum information, which does not possess
> the property of
> copying (this famous property is called the no-cloning
> theorem).
quantum as opposed
On Monday 28 July 2008 04:06, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> Antonio Olivares wrote:
> It's a huge mistake to create analogies between information and property.
>
> If the cow were software, you and I could both milk it. It would never
> run out. That's the way information works: you copy it and the ori
> > You know I really don't care what you call it, but
> I do care that you are
> > systematically driving people away from free software.
>
> Away from Free Software or away from Fedora and Linux, that
^
^ Do you really mean Linux, I thought y
Antonio Olivares wrote:
But GNU utilities exist in *BSD camps as well, and the name GNU/*BSD is not used or required. A page explains that since Linux Distributions are more popular than *BSD distributions, it makes much more sense to attach to a more successful project.
Not to the same ext
On Jul 28, 2008, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You know I really don't care what you call it, but I do care that you are
> systematically driving people away from free software.
Away from Free Software or away from Fedora and Linux, that are both
non-Free Software, and vocally not interes
On Jul 28, 2008, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please take this off list. And if you are not representing a Red Hat
> viewpoint perhaps you would also care to post from a personal email
> address.
Already covered, even in this thread.
There are no limits to the distractions people will c
On Jul 28, 2008, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> laugh at Alexandra and ignore him ?
^
Wow, it wasn't enough to rename the operating system and the movement,
now you're trying to rename *me*? :-)
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Softw
> > I care about freedom, I just do not care for the GNU
> attaching
> > itself to Linux
>
> That's a decision that Linux developers made very early
> on in their
> project. They just decided to deny it to fool you. And
> yet, you side
> with them.
That is how I knew about it, When I used my fir
Please take this off list. And if you are not representing a Red Hat
viewpoint perhaps you would also care to post from a personal email
address.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
On Jul 28, 2008, Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I care about freedom, I just do not care for the GNU attaching
> itself to Linux
That's a decision that Linux developers made very early on in their
project. They just decided to deny it to fool you. And yet, you side
with them.
>
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:43:36 -0300
Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2008, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Please take your war elsewhere. The civilians are tired of having to put
> > up with you.
>
> ... says a member of the opposing army with a vested interest i
On Jul 28, 2008, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please take your war elsewhere. The civilians are tired of having to put
> up with you.
... says a member of the opposing army with a vested interest in
having his faction prevail.
Hey, you haven't stopped calling the GNU OS Linux, why shoul
> "I apologize for this, but I simply do not want to
> agree to name the
> system $ uname -o, it is my right and freedom to simply say
> Linux. "
>
> Does it make any difference to that right if you laugh at
> Alexandra and
> ignore him ?
>
I do not know if it would make a difference. I do not
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 09:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > It is a war.
> > >
> > > Indeed. A war for freedom for all software users.
> >
> > Please take your war elsewhere. The civilians are tired of
> > having to put
> > up with you.
> >
> > Alan
>
> Why m
> > > It is a war.
> >
> > Indeed. A war for freedom for all software users.
>
> Please take your war elsewhere. The civilians are tired of
> having to put
> up with you.
>
> Alan
Why me? What have I done wrong?
Let me remind you, in case you have forgotten, you fought well and fought hard
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 10:23:04 -0500
Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >
> >> It is a war.
> >
> > Indeed. A war for freedom for all software users.
>
> No, it is really a war against users where one set of developers have
> pit themselves irreconcilably agains
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Les Mikesell
> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 11:23 AM
> To: For users of Fedora
> Subject: Re: that old GNU/Linux argument
>
> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >
> >&g
> > What is a soapbox? I am thinking you mean a soap
> opera, or somthing
> > along those lines.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soapbox
>
> poc
>
> --
I did not know that! Thank you for sharing knowledge. I learned something new
today :)
Regards,
Antonio
--
fedora-list mail
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
It is a war.
Indeed. A war for freedom for all software users.
No, it is really a war against users where one set of developers have
pit themselves irreconcilably against all others making any sort of
cooperation impossible. Participating in this war can only red
On Sun, 2008-07-27 at 23:38 -0700, Antonio Olivares wrote:
> What is a soapbox? I am thinking you mean a soap opera, or somthing
> along those lines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soapbox
poc
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listi
måndagen den 28 juli 2008 skrev Antonio Olivares:
> > If the cow is completely free in the same sense as in the
> > GPL, then it
> > can't have been given as a gift,
>
> Why can't it be given as a gift,
Because it can't be moved. If the cow is free in the sense of the GPL, then it
is information,
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 04:36:53 -0300
Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2008, Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > It is a war.
>
> Indeed. A war for freedom for all software users.
Please take your war elsewhere. The civilians are tired of having to put
up wit
> > It is a war.
>
> Indeed. A war for freedom for all software users. A war
> that started
> back in 1983, and whose proponents have suffered many
> threats and
> losses, but also several wins.
>
> One of the greatest threats these days are people who just
> don't care
> about freedom, who jus
> > It is a war.
>
> Indeed. A war for freedom for all software users. A war
> that started
> back in 1983, and whose proponents have suffered many
> threats and
> losses, but also several wins.
>
> One of the greatest threats these days are people who just
> don't care
> about freedom, who jus
On Jul 28, 2008, Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is a war.
Indeed. A war for freedom for all software users. A war that started
back in 1983, and whose proponents have suffered many threats and
losses, but also several wins.
One of the greatest threats these days are people wh
> >> Nothing is said that has not been said before.
> >> Terence
> >> Roman comic dramatist (185 BC - 159 BC)
> >>
> >> --
> >
> > +3 or 4) how many times the thread has been renamed :)
> >
> > All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that
> good men do nothing
>
> this a
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 5:14 AM, Antonio Olivares
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Nothing is said that has not been said before.
>> Terence
>> Roman comic dramatist (185 BC - 159 BC)
>>
>> --
>
> +3 or 4) how many times the thread has been renamed :)
>
> All that is necessary for th
> > Why can't it be given as a gift, you are free to
> do whatever you want
> > with the cow. If you decide to let the cow eat hay and
> have calves, the
> > calves that you have can be shared with thy neighbor.
> This is what the
> > GPL enforces. The neighbor needs milk, he can milk
> your cow. R
> Nothing is said that has not been said before.
> Terence
> Roman comic dramatist (185 BC - 159 BC)
>
> --
+3 or 4) how many times the thread has been renamed :)
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
--
fedora-list mailing lis
Antonio Olivares wrote:
Why can't it be given as a gift, you are free to do whatever you want
with the cow. If you decide to let the cow eat hay and have calves, the
calves that you have can be shared with thy neighbor. This is what the
GPL enforces. The neighbor needs milk, he can milk your cow.
Nothing is said that has not been said before.
Terence
Roman comic dramatist (185 BC - 159 BC)
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jul 26, 2008, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd prefer that the Linux based distros had shared more of the
BSD-origin work rather than the GPL-encumbered GNU copies.
Obviously. Have you ever wondered why?
If you are stuck with the viral nature of the GPL
> > If there was no kernel, the GNU operating system would
> not have gone
> > anywhere
>
> It would have completed it eventually, or someone else
> would have
> developed another kernel that would work with GNU. ATM we
> have at
> least 4.
>
> > without the GNU tools, where would Linux be?
>
>
On Jul 26, 2008, Antonio Olivares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If there was no kernel, the GNU operating system would not have gone
> anywhere
It would have completed it eventually, or someone else would have
developed another kernel that would work with GNU. ATM we have at
least 4.
> without t
On Sat, 2008-07-26 at 13:49 -0700, Antonio Olivares wrote:
> > > I have also found a page in which it clearly explains
> > some problems with
> > > the GPL
> > The analogy
> > collapses once you realize that information can not be
> > moved, only copied,
> > and matter can not be copied, only mo
On Jul 26, 2008, Marko Vojinovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sure, RMS and GNU did begin to create an operating system, but failed to
> finish it
before Linus took the "unfinished" OS and finished it himself. IOW,
Linus completed GNU?
> And now they ask for credit? For what? For cloning&enhan
On Jul 26, 2008, Gordon Messmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Theo continued to complain about the lack of cooperation between the
> Linux driver authors and the original OpenBSD developers. The problem
> that he perceived was that the Linux driver developers created a
> derived work, and the code
On Jul 26, 2008, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd prefer that the Linux based distros had shared more of the
> BSD-origin work rather than the GPL-encumbered GNU copies.
Obviously. Have you ever wondered why?
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Sof
On Friday 25 July 2008 07:56, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> I think that some knowledge of history would probably change your
> perspective, and is certainly relevant to the conversation.
Probably, but it seems that the argument I am trying to communicate is based
on discussing the *purpose* of Linux a
:-) I'll try to be just a little bit shorter. Though I may not succeed. ;-)
On Friday 25 July 2008 20:18, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jul 24, 2008, Marko Vojinovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > the kernel "does the essential work" (actually, it communicates
> > further to the hardware that does
On Saturday 26 July 2008 01:26, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jul 24, 2008, Marko Vojinovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Persons A and B are running a marathon on the Olympic games.
>
> You're quite creative at presenting analogies that sound convincing to
> support a point you're trying to make, a
Antonio Olivares wrote:
If the information cannot be moved, how come the wireless drivers
built with BSD license in OpenBSD by Theo de Raadt were moved to GPL
license.
Theo didn't write the drivers. Reyk Floeter and Sam Leffler did.
The drivers weren't "moved" to the GPL, either. There was
> > I have also found a page in which it clearly explains
> some problems with
> > the GPL
> > 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
>
Antonio Olivares wrote:
> I have also found a page in which it clearly explains some problems with
> the GPL
> 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
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
What do you mean "other than the Hurd"?
I mean "except for the Hurd", "save for the Hurd", or however you'd
like to phrase the act of taking a set with hundreds of elements, and
applying the same predicate to all but one of them.
I don't mean t
> > 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
On Jul 26, 2008, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>
>>> What do you mean "other than the Hurd"?
>>
>> I mean "except for the Hurd", "save for the Hurd", or however you'd
>> like to phrase the act of taking a set with hundreds of elements, and
>> applying the same
> > Do you know what the BIOS actually does?
>
> Yep. It loads the kernel and transfers control to it. At
> times, it
> provides the kernel with essential information about the
> configuration
> of the system. At times, in some cases, the kernel
> requests the BIOS
> to perform certain essentia
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
What do you mean "other than the Hurd"?
I mean "except for the Hurd", "save for the Hurd", or however you'd
like to phrase the act of taking a set with hundreds of elements, and
applying the same predicate to all but one of them.
I don't mean the semantics, I mean phi
On Jul 25, 2008, Les <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you know what the BIOS actually does?
Yep. It loads the kernel and transfers control to it. At times, it
provides the kernel with essential information about the configuration
of the system. At times, in some cases, the kernel requests the B
On Jul 25, 2008, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What do you mean "other than the Hurd"?
I mean "except for the Hurd", "save for the Hurd", or however you'd
like to phrase the act of taking a set with hundreds of elements, and
applying the same predicate to all but one of them.
Look at
> > That's what enables GNU libc to offer the same
> API and,
> > at times, even the same ABI, while targeting very
> different kernels.
> >
> >> Who did that port?? Linus and his team?
> >
> > Most certainly. I can't quite picture the GNU
> project putting
> > resources into the early developm
On Jul 24, 2008, Marko Vojinovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Persons A and B are running a marathon on the Olympic games.
You're quite creative at presenting analogies that sound convincing to
support a point you're trying to make, and that hide all of their
flaws in the careful manipulation of
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jul 25, 2008, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So why change the name of something people do want to include
something they never have wanted?
Would you mind mentioning the components of the GNU operating system,
other than the Hurd, that aren't present in any
On Jul 25, 2008, Bjoern Schiessle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Who did that port?? Linus and his team?
>>
>> Most certainly. I can't quite picture the GNU project putting
>> resources into the early development of GNU+Linux to make the
>> combinati
On Jul 25, 2008, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So why change the name of something people do want to include
> something they never have wanted?
Would you mind mentioning the components of the GNU operating system,
other than the Hurd, that aren't present in any GNU+Linux
distribution
Do you know what the BIOS actually does?
Regards,
Les H
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 02:03 -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jul 24, 2008, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Marko Vojinovic:
> >>> But tell me, what is in principle The Single Most Important element
> >>> of the car? There is only one
Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Who did that port?? Linus and his team?
>
> Most certainly. I can't quite picture the GNU project putting
> resources into the early development of GNU+Linux to make the
> combination usable. Linux was not perceived as a relevant kernel for
> the GNU
On Jul 24, 2008, Marko Vojinovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As far as I know, the purpose of a kernel is to abstract the hardware layer
> from the userspace software (this is of course an oversimplification, but I
> believe it is sufficient for making the parallel).
Yup. In fact, there are s
> Except that when they were written, no system exactly matched what they
> specified so you couldn't rely on them to work although they might have
> been useful to point fingers at the non-complying implementations.
Very much untrue. If you stuck to what POSIX guaranteed then you got very
porta
Alan Cox wrote:
Yes, there was some version of the Posix standard in that time frame.
It was just incomplete and described some mythical system that matched
no existing BSD or SysV flavor, so it was mostly ignored. Sort of like
Not really the case.
POSIX described a set of behaviours that w
> Yes, there was some version of the Posix standard in that time frame.
> It was just incomplete and described some mythical system that matched
> no existing BSD or SysV flavor, so it was mostly ignored. Sort of like
Not really the case.
POSIX described a set of behaviours that were Unixlike
Björn Persson wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
I've forgotten the timing, but I don't think Posix had a full/useful
spec until well after Linux. AT&T's SVID spec (published for sysvr4
around 1989) would have been about right. Posix wasn't very complete
until 1995 or so.
On the third of July 1991,
Les Mikesell wrote:
> I've forgotten the timing, but I don't think Posix had a full/useful
> spec until well after Linux. AT&T's SVID spec (published for sysvr4
> around 1989) would have been about right. Posix wasn't very complete
> until 1995 or so.
On the third of July 1991, Linus Torvalds as
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 12:47 +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
> Tim wrote:
> > Speaking as someone who studied (at college) computing from the
> > component level, and has built systems from the chip level. I mean
> > breadboarding CPUs, RAM, I/O, etc., not just putting together IBM
> > clones. As well
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
That's what enables GNU libc to offer the same API and,
at times, even the same ABI, while targeting very different kernels.
Who did that port?? Linus and his team?
Most certainly. I can't quite picture the GNU project putting
resources into the early development of G
1 - 100 of 371 matches
Mail list logo
