Once upon a time, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> said: > My main problem is that for a good portion of the 1990's the GNU operating > system was HURD and any and all work on Linux was seen as a major > distraction and removal of resources from the more important operating > system. In the early 1990's, I don't remember the GNU hackers at the AI lab > calling their systems GNU/Solaris or GNU/Ultrix or GNU/BSD when they had > replaced various parts with GNU utilities. The only GNU OS was going to be > HURD. Also, a new community developed around systems running the Linux kernel, and that community made significant contributions to GNU projects. AFAIK at the time, nobody else was really trying to run a whole system on things like glibc and coreutils (which was separate packages at the time IIRC). A lot of functionality in those projects exists because the Linux community got it done. So to me, claiming that the resulting system must be GNU/Linux is ignoring that a lot of GNU stuff would not be where it is today without the Linux community - should glibc be called Linux/GNU libc? I don't believe so, just like I don't believe an OS assembled from Linux, GNU, and many other bits should be called GNU/Linux. Also, Linux is more than just a kernel - there are a number of userland bits that are Linux specific (often because GNU didn't have them and the various BSDs' equivalents wouldn't fit the Linux way). For example, iproute and net-tools come to mind. -- Chris Adams <linux@xxxxxxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
