that old GNU/Linux argument

[Les Mikesell]

Gordon Messmer wrote:

>>
>> If they were compiled under cygwin/mingwin they could be windows 
>> binaries.  That doesn't justify changing their name.
> 
> I think it's pretty clear that you're arguing to have the last word. 

Which is only a problem when there is more than one participant.

> Your arguments have become nonsense.  No one is suggesting that the 
> names of any applications to "GNU" just because they were built on GNU.
> 
> What we *are* advocating is that the GNU/Linux operating system be 
> referred to as GNU/Linux because GNU is the name of the project whose 
> goal is to provide a complete Free Software operating system.

But that's a small minority of the code in the distribution.

> All of 
> the thousands of developers who have contributed their code to the GNU 
> project agree that the name of the operating system is "GNU".

Great - if you had a distribution where that was the majority of the 
content you might have a point.  But that's not the case.

> If you 
> think you're better qualified than they are too tell them what to call 
> their software, then you're much too far out of touch for any of us to 
> convince you otherwise.

I'm not the one trying to dictate the name used for other people's 
software.  I think it is wrong.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com