Why no mention of GNU?

[Christoph Georgi]

Although I don't know much of any ideology/religion/... of Linux or GNU, 
I think that GNU should be mentioned, too. AFAIK the "work" of Stallman 
(e.g. GCC),  is as important to Linux as is the work of Torvalds. 
Without any of the two, Stallman or Torvalds, Linux would not exist in 
the form it exists today (please correct me if I'm mistaken). From this 
background, I think it is only right to apprechiate GNU as we 
apprechiate Linux, i.e. it should be mentioned.

thanks
.christoph


Eric Feliksik wrote:
> Now hoary is out, there is time for talking. On ubuntu-devel, this
> question was asked (see
> http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2005-March/006386.html ).
> I am very interested, but Matt Zimmerman requested to move this thread
> to this list.
> 
> Here I go:
> As Ubuntu would all be about the spirit of free software, I
> think mentioning and being proud of the GNU project would be in place.
> The topicstarter mentioned ubuntu is a Debian derivative. I know there
> are more Debian projects, like Debian GNU/Hurd, so one could say the
> GNU/Linux naming is for disambiguation. Still, GNU/Linux is a right name.
> 
> Of course, Linux is more known. Linux is easier to say than GNU/Linux.
> Of course, Richard Stallman is a highly controversial fundamentalist.
> And that's why he deserves all my respect.
> 
> Why call it just "Linux"? Of course, everybody does, and 'no-one' knows
> about the GNU. Well, almost no-one knows about Linux either, and Ubuntu
> is here to bring the spirit of free software to the masses, right?
> Linux, at least for Linus Torvalds, has always been more a technical
> than an ideological project. I understand the term "open source" might
> be useful when speaking to managers and the likes, and that the terms
> open-source and Linux have been widely used to describe and promote the
> technical merits of the system. However, in the end, I think it's
> immensely important to appreciate the ideology of the GNU project. What
> happens otherwise is that a mother gives her child vitamine pills,
> saying "Take this, it's very tasty". It's nice if the kid eats it, but
> saving to seduce the child every day is not the solution.
> 
> There is no need to let Ubuntu fulfill the role of the FSF, or GNU.org
> (we all know RMS is already shocked by the fact Ubuntu distributes the
> multiverse repository, as it contains non-free sofware).  If Ubuntu,
> howevery, wants to take a more balanced approach, by being pragmatic on
> one side, and evangelizing on the other, mentioning the GNU project more
> clearly is a good thing. How, exactly, should be open for debate.
> 
> Let the discussion begin. Thanks for you time.
> 
> Eric Feliksik
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 


Christoph Georgi
-----------------------------
email.  christoph.georgi at web.de
fon.	+64 (0)9 815 8259

registered linux user #380268
ubuntulinux 4.10 (warty)