Colin Paul Adams wrote:
> So I may mean different things at different times.

Then I hope it's obvious from the context what you mean each time. Otherwise
it'll be confusing.

> I talk about
> running Linux. This is a shorthand for running GNOME in X11 with a
> Linux kernel plus lots of other software.

I'd probably talk about running Fedora in that case.

Björn Persson

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
> Björn Persson wrote:
> > Fedora isn't Linux, it's a Linux distribution, but everyone calls all
> > Linux distributions "Linux", so Fedora should be called "Linux" even
> > though it isn't Linux? Is that what you're saying? Unfortunately that
> > doesn't help much with defining what Linux *is*.
> >
> > Or do you mean that Fedora isn't *equal* to Linux, it's just *a* Linux,
> > but everyone calls all Linuxes "Linux"?
>
> It is kind of like the difference between a car, a Ford, and a
> Mustang. A car does not have to be a Ford to be a car. A Ford doea
> not have to be a Mustang. But it is still correct to call a Mustang
> a car.

Should I take that to mean that your concept of "Linux" is the same as Thomas
Cameron's, whatever his concept really is?

Björn Persson

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

On Jul 20, 2008, Timothy Murphy <gayleard@eircom.net> wrote:

> It only listed places where one can buy a CD.
> Surely 99% of the people who might try Hurd would have broadband access?

Would this mean its developers shouldn't try to encourage fund raising
through sales of CDs? (Not that that's what they're doing, I don't
know, but your surprise is still surprising to me)

--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
FSFLA Board Member ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 17:32 +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
> Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > trying (fruitlessly it seems) to get some
> > consistency in the use of terminology,
>
> That's what I'm trying to achieve too. Or if it isn't possible to get people
> to agree on terminology, then I'd like to at least understand what people
> mean when they use a word. To that end I'm asking people what they mean when
> they say "Linux", but so far I'm not getting very clear anwers.
>
> Would you like to tell us where *you* draw the line? What is part of Linux in
> your mind, and what is not part of Linux?

Actually I try not to draw lines if at all possible, because you then
get into absurd discussions as to whether X+epsilon should be considered
still X, but X-epsilon is not X (for some X). Human language doesn't
work that way and forcing it into that mould is the province of lawyers
and thus best avoided. It's necessary when discussing license agreements
and contracts, but not otherwise.

In fact I doubt you can do it either, in such a way as to unambiguously
encompass everything you want to call GNU/Linux and unambiguously
exclude everything else. That's what "drawing a line" means, and I won't
go there.

Having said that, my *usage* of the term "Linux" encompasses any
accumulation of software that has a useful purpose and is constructed
around a Linux kernel. This includes GNU+Linux, X+Linux,
Fedora/Debian/Ubuntu/Slackware/etc. and the system that runs my wife's
RAZR-2 cellphone.

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful
tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor
less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean
so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master -
that's all.'

Through The Looking Glass, Lewis Carroll

poc


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

On Jul 20, 2008, Timothy Murphy <gayleard@eircom.net> wrote:

> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> That people made this silly and childish mistake of renaming the GNU
>> operating system to Linux is unfair *and* it works against the very
>> evangelization you claim to support.

> There is no such thing as the GNU operating system,
> unless you mean GNU/Hurd, which no-one would call Linux.

Actually, Hurd is the primary kernel of the GNU operating system. So,
no, GNU by itself pretty much implies the kernel is Hurd.

That said, as I wrote before, when you take out any single component
of the operating system it still remains pretty much the same.

Again, if you wrote a chapter or two in a book containing some dozens
of chapters (say 20 pages out of 500), would it be legitimate for you
to say you wrote a book?

If you had copied some 15 chapters (say some 200 pages) from another
book by another author into this book you might or might not claim to
have authored yourself, would you legitimately claim you're the
primary author of this book?

--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
FSFLA Board Member ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

On Jul 20, 2008, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com> wrote:

> I can't recall ever having any reason to
> have a name for a subset of a distribution that only included the GNU
> components and the kernel. Can someone who uses this term explain the
> circumstances where it is useful?

/me mumbles something about UNIX and UNIX-like

--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
FSFLA Board Member ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Björn Persson wrote:


Linux has always been just a kernel. But what you usually describe is a
complete distribution.


And when you talk about a complete distribution, do you call it "Linux" or do
you call it "Fedora" or "CentOS" or "Slackware"?


Generally "CentOS", since for the reasons I might have to talk about it,
the distribution infrastructure and specific content choices are
important, although I might mention "Fedora" to contrast the infrastructure.


The application I work on in my job uses some Linux-specific features and some
GNU-specific ones. It wouldn't be nearly as good if we'd use only POSIX
interfaces. We could probably port it to one of the BSDs for example, and we
might achieve similar performance there, but currently it requires GNU and
Linux so it could be described as a GNU/Linux application.


The only GNU-specific features that come to the top of my head are the
-a option to cp (and I usually use rsync anyway where it would be
useful) and the copious non-standard options to gnutar that sometimes
turn out to be useful. Are there others that really matter? It would
be nice to have a list to avoid in portable code and scripts.


But sometimes I want to say something about all distributions that are based
on GNU and Linux. Then I call them "GNU/Linux-based distributions". If I
wanted to include Debian GNU/Hurd and Debian GNU/kFreeBSD too, but not
FreeBSD, NetBSD or OpenBSD, then I'd say "GNU-based distributions".



If you aren't distributing copies and thus having to pay attention to
the associated source distribution obligation imposed by the GNU/GPL
components there should be little reason to know or care about that
layer of infrastructure or whether it has original unix roots or a bsd
or gnu flavored clone.


--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

On Jul 20, 2008, Colin Paul Adams <colin@colina.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> So I may mean different things at different times. I talk about
> running Linux. This is a shorthand for running GNOME in X11 with a
> Linux kernel plus lots of other software.

Are you even sure it's Linux underneath? :-)

> Some of it isn't even GPL .

This sentence may be interpreted in several different ways. Would you
please elaborate on what you meant to communicate by adding it, so
that I can tell whether or not it's based on a very common
misunderstanding?

Thanks,

--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
FSFLA Board Member ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

* Björn Persson <listor3.rombobeorn@tdcpost.se> [20080720 19:52]:
[snip: lots of hairsplitting and otherwise ludicrous statements]
>
> Fedora isn't Linux, it's a Linux distribution, but everyone calls all Linux
> distributions "Linux", so Fedora should be called "Linux" even though it
> isn't Linux? Is that what you're saying? Unfortunately that doesn't help much
> with defining what Linux *is*.
>
> Or do you mean that Fedora isn't *equal* to Linux, it's just *a* Linux, but
> everyone calls all Linuxes "Linux"?

I have a hard time understanding if you are actually serious, or if
you are just taking the mick with these types of statements.

Is it really so hard to grasp that the term "Linux" can (and does)
mean different things depending on context, who you are talking to,
and the counterparts technical savvy?

I also would like to know why you have the absolute fascination and
the palpable need to obtain a totally absolute definition of "Linux".

[snip: more hairsplitting]

/Anders

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Thomas Cameron wrote:

On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 02:00 -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

On Jul 19, 2008, Thomas Cameron <thomas.cameron@camerontech.com>
wrote:

Look at it from the outside, Alexandre. There are many who feel

that

the FSF's demand for everyone to pay homage by calling it GNU/Linux

is

just an attempt to steal the "glory" of Linus's success.

*If* that was the case, it would just be returning the alleged glory
to the project that most deserved it. The people who most strongly
oppose this correction are precisely those who stole the "glory" of
GNU's success.


Um, hold on a sec, there. "Stole?" To steal typically means to have
the intent to deprive another of property. I've been using Linux since
1995, and I've never, ever seen anyone in the Linux community indicate
that they intended to deprive GNU of any property or even credit for all
they've done.


I don't know how you can possibly object to Alexandre's use of the word
"stole", when it was a response to your using the *same* word in the
*same* context in the message that he replied to.


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list