The GNU Project (Was: [CentOS] Re: Reboots -- LSB 2.1 Core Generic Section 8.5)

[Rodrigo Barbosa]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Just commenting the main points, since this is becoming way off-topic.

Executive summary: You seem to have a misunderstandment of what the
GNU Project is.

On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 12:20:53AM -0500, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
> Although many "GNU Compatible Systems" use the GNU Compiler Collection
> (GCC), at the heart of _any_ GNU system are the GNU C Libraries (GLibC).
> That's really a _major_, _technical_ detail!

The Linux Kernel doesn't make use of glibc.

Even then, if you look at the glibc license, you will see it is
licensed under the LGPL, which allow even comercial software (non-free)
to link against it. 

> And then there are the standard utilities and other components that
> replace the legacy BSD and AT&T ones.  Once again, hallmarks of a GNU
> system, quite different than legacy BSD and AT&T.

There is no such thing as a "GNU System". Either something is a GNU
project, or it is not. GNU is not an idea, it is a name, a brand.
And copyright Free Software Foundation.

> > and, again, it is not a GNU Kernel. HURD is a GNU kernel.
> Never said it was the GNU HURD Microkernel.  But Linux is still a GNU
> system, designed by Linus to be a GNU system.  This is _technical_ fact,
> not some Stallman marketing consideration.

No, it is NOT a technical fact. It was designed to be a pet project,
and not to be a GNU system.

 From Linus' mouth: " I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, 
won't be big and professional like gnu)"

He is clearly stating it is not GNU, and not going to be GNU. Just a hobby.

> > A Linux distribution (exception being Debian) is not more a GNU
> > operating system than a X11/BSD/Name-Your-License Operating system.
> 
> My God, so you _are_ about "brand name" and not "technical accuracy."
> You are so focused on marketing and not reality.

If you want technical accuracy, I would like to point you to Linus
original post about Linux.

http://www.msfn.org/board/lofiversion/index.php/t40457.html

> What makes Debian's Linux distribution more of a GNU system than
> the others?  The branding "Debian GNU/Linux"?

No. Debian is a GNU project.

> Dude, this is technical fact.  One of the things I have worked with
> engineers on in the defense industry is support, building, cross
> compilers, tools, etc... for countless platforms.  It's a technical fact
> from a developer/integrator standpoint that Linux is a GNU system.

I think you are mistaken about what GNU is. GNU is a Free Software Foundation
project to create a free Unix-like system. That becomes clear from what
you have written beyond this point.

Unless the project is lead, coordinated or endorsed by FSF, it is NOT
a GNU project. The copyright of any GNU project is given to the FSF.

Yes, it is correct to call Linux a "GNU Operating System Variant", but
Linux is definitively NOT a GNU project.

Actually, to be "technicaly accurate", there is no such thing as
a "GNU System", not even from GNU/FSF.

I recomend you to carefuly read about the Free Software Foundation,
the GNU Project, and the history of Linux. Also, please read and
text of the LGPL (not GPL).

Take care.

- -- 
Rodrigo Barbosa <rodrigob at suespammers.org>
"Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur"
"Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCn/zxpdyWzQ5b5ckRAuCsAKCzwmP9WLxK+7cjan8qL6rgXwUPTQCbBPl+
MndxO6BRfmsJfLLjdT4esvw=
=QrHZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----