3 ms·

Iirc, Linus doesn't care about calling it Linux v GNU/Linux

mkr-hn 14y ago
That's the joke. Stallman acolytes tut-tut any usage of "Linux" that isn't referring to the kernel. The rest of the world happily uses the term for all contexts with no confusion. In fact, talking about the kernel is the only time it could be confusing. We have "Linux kernel" for that lone source of confusion. The Linux kernel is at the center of the Linux ecosystem. The Linux ecosystem has many Linux distributions based on the Linux kernel. Words are flexible, and language has tools to deal with confusion.
- e12e 14y ago
  > The Linux ecosystem has many Linux distributions based on the Linux kernel. There are many operating system distributions that run the Linux kernel. But something like Debian/kFreebsd or illumos are in many ways quite similar to other distributions like Ubuntu -- without running on Linux. The Linux kernel is a tremendously important piece of the Free software world we live in -- but it isn't a userland -- and I don't understand why people that actually understand the difference gets so worked up about it. The GNU userland is important. The Gnome project is important. Xorg is important. The Apache foundation software is important. I don't see why people insist on labelling these things "Linux". The GNU name actually makes sense: GNU's not unix. But it's close. You can compile GNU software and run it on Microsoft Windows. Or under OS X. GNU is a platform. Sort of.
  - mkr-hn 14y ago
    "GNU/Linux" is clunky. And I'm badgered with it any time I use the much less clunky "Linux." The people pushing the RMS-approved term hardest have no concept of presentation, and it turns people off of listening. I would be instantly associated with the worst pushers of the term if I started using it, so it's a nonstarter. Edit: GNU would get more attention if the FSF partnered with major Linux distribution vendors to give GNU a prominent placement in installers, documentation, and marketing. RMS peeing a line at the unmarketable "GNU/Linux" is only going to alienate people.
    - pjmlp 14y ago
      Debian
      - mkr-hn 14y ago
        I meant an actual partnership, with co-branding and everything. A mention of GNU buried in a page most people aren't going to look at won't have the desired effect. Look at the website for any convention and you'll see what I mean. For example: http://www.e3expo.com/splash/ http://www.e3expo.com/splash/ And hopefully it'll work better than this: http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/29/linux-car-first-to-crash-at-indianapolis-500/ http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/29/linux-car-first-to-crash-...

That's the joke. Stallman acolytes tut-tut any usage of "Linux" that isn't referring to the kernel. The rest of the world happily uses the term for all contexts with no confusion. In fact, talking about the kernel is the only time it could be confusing. We have "Linux kernel" for that lone source of confusion. The Linux kernel is at the center of the Linux ecosystem. The Linux ecosystem has many Linux distributions based on the Linux kernel. Words are flexible, and language has tools to deal with confusion.

e12e 14y ago
> The Linux ecosystem has many Linux distributions based on the Linux kernel. There are many operating system distributions that run the Linux kernel. But something like Debian/kFreebsd or illumos are in many ways quite similar to other distributions like Ubuntu -- without running on Linux. The Linux kernel is a tremendously important piece of the Free software world we live in -- but it isn't a userland -- and I don't understand why people that actually understand the difference gets so worked up about it. The GNU userland is important. The Gnome project is important. Xorg is important. The Apache foundation software is important. I don't see why people insist on labelling these things "Linux". The GNU name actually makes sense: GNU's not unix. But it's close. You can compile GNU software and run it on Microsoft Windows. Or under OS X. GNU is a platform. Sort of.
- mkr-hn 14y ago
  "GNU/Linux" is clunky. And I'm badgered with it any time I use the much less clunky "Linux." The people pushing the RMS-approved term hardest have no concept of presentation, and it turns people off of listening. I would be instantly associated with the worst pushers of the term if I started using it, so it's a nonstarter. Edit: GNU would get more attention if the FSF partnered with major Linux distribution vendors to give GNU a prominent placement in installers, documentation, and marketing. RMS peeing a line at the unmarketable "GNU/Linux" is only going to alienate people.
  - pjmlp 14y ago
    Debian
    - mkr-hn 14y ago
      I meant an actual partnership, with co-branding and everything. A mention of GNU buried in a page most people aren't going to look at won't have the desired effect. Look at the website for any convention and you'll see what I mean. For example: http://www.e3expo.com/splash/ http://www.e3expo.com/splash/ And hopefully it'll work better than this: http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/29/linux-car-first-to-crash-at-indianapolis-500/ http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/29/linux-car-first-to-crash-...