[olug] Why it's okay to say "Linux" and not specifically "GNU/Linux"

[cbird.omaha at gmail.com]

stallman needs to let go.




On Jul 8, 2010 12:48am, Luke-Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 07, 2010 11:25:21 pm Anthony Base wrote:

> > To (mercifully) sum this writing up so that it isn't such a big read,

> > Linux (as a name) covers the scope of all distros using a technology,

> > GNU/Linux does not, but it's nice to do so. People really should know

> > that Linux is just a program, a kernel, and the operating system as a

> > general whole doesn't exactly have a name, so you should call it by the

> > distro name. The full text is below.



> Linux isn't always common either. But everyone has 'man'! Let's call the

> entire group of operating systems 'man'. (sarcastic meaning: a common  
> program

> does not imply a good title for a collection)



> I tend to call each operating system by its own name (Debian, RHEL,  
> Fedora,

> Ubuntu, etc), but if I am going to refer to the entire set (which also  
> often

> includes operating systems such as FreeBSD and co), I'll probably use  
> *nix or

> POSIX depending on the context. Or if I really do mean the subset that  
> most

> people think when they say "Linux", I'll refet to "the GNU system"-- after

> all, it's the GNU system that is a common user interface to these  
> operating

> systems, not Linux (which nobody *uses* directly at all and can be  
> replaced on

> a whim if the hardware supports the replacement). In general, if I use the

> word Linux, I am speaking specifically of the kernel.

> _______________________________________________

> OLUG mailing list

> OLUG at olug.org

> https://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug