that old GNU/Linux argument

[Les Mikesell]

Björn Persson wrote:
> Colin Paul Adams wrote:
>> I myself almost always say Linux. It is just quicker.
> 
> And would you like to tell us what *you* mean when *you* say "Linux"? What is 
> part of Linux in your mind, and what is not part of Linux?
> 

Linux has always been just a kernel.  But what you usually describe is a 
complete distribution.  I can't recall ever having any reason to have a 
name for a subset of a distribution that only included the GNU 
components and the kernel.  Can someone who uses this term explain the 
circumstances where it is useful?  This subset rarely/never exists by 
itself and it doesn't make much sense to name it, although you might 
need to talk about the kernel specifically or the complete distribution 
as a whole.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com