Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 5 Jan 1999 03:47:34 -0500 (EST) | From | <> | Subject | Re: [OFFTOPIC] Gnumenclature was Re: IBM, was never Re: Linux Kernel |
| |
> well, apart from glibc and gcc, gasm, cpp, ld and other compilation > tools there are also bash, shellutils, fileutils, findutils, textutils, > gnu m4, gnu make, gnu awk, and gnu sed that i can think of off the top > of my head. > > these tools constitute the bulk of a basic unix system (a unix system > may have more tools than these, but they won't/shouldn't have any less), > and they're all FSF/GNU programs developed as part of the GNU system... > > ....and that's exactly stallman's point - the GNU system existed long > before the linux kernel did. When Linux came along, the only thing > missing from GNU was a free kernel. Linux filled that gap, resulting > instantly in a complete, free operating system. > > GNU is the system, Linux is the kernel. GNU/Linux is the GNU system > running on a Linux kernel. > > (similarly, GNU/Hurd will mean the GNU system running an a HURD kernel) > > > as for your comments about rms acting like a 'twit' or a 'two year old > child', i think you should look at your own behaviour and blinkered > comments on this issue before pointing the finger at anyone else. >
I'm wondering is how is that GNU "owns" those utils... from recent grep on gcc Changelog I didn't see much contributed by GNU(mainly rms)besides bunch of configuration changes to change unknown to pc and linux to linux-guess in config.guess and few changes in getloadavg.c. So how does GNU owns those utils, I thought the point of GNU was that nobody owned something exculsively.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |