that old GNU/Linux argument

[Antonio Olivares]

> In as much as you help the other side by adopting an unfair
> name, it
> is indeed in part your fault.  You've become an
> accomplice of this
> unfairness.
Okay, they are the ones who are wrong, but they are not free as you have pointed out.  Maybe it is okay to call the projects Linux because they are non-free.

For those that want to run truly free systems TRUE(GNU/Linux) may vistit
http://www.fsfla.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-libre

and download a free* kernel from 
http://www.fsfla.org/~lxoliva/fsfla/linux-libre/

This way the OS that they will be running will be the true GNU/Linux that you and other FSF promoters are asking.  

Ours is not a true GNU/Linux, because it contains BAD stuff that makes it nonfree, is that a valid conclusion? 

> > Linux Distributions include that and they call
> themselves Linux
> > Distributions not GNU/Linux Distributions with the
> excepion of
> > Debian GNU/Linux.
> 
> That a lot of people insist in a mistake doesn't make
> it right.

Now I have an argument that makes it right.  They are non-free they include  stuff that is no-no from FSF.  See top comment :)
> 
> Debian is far from the only one who uses a fair name for
> the distros,
> or to describe it.  Heck, there's even a commercial
> distro in Brazil
> called Insigne GNU/Linux, by Insigne Free Software do
> Brasil.
Cool, I did not know that :). I have only heard of Conectiva, which was bought out by Mandrake Soft and became Mandriva.  I have heard of Kurumin and also of GoblinX, which is a sister distro of Slax, one of my favorites along with Fedora.  There are others that have XP like qualities and also some based on Gentoo like Litrix as well :)
> 
> > Yet your buddies still leech off Fedora and get their
> guidelines off
> > the Fedora site
> 
> *blinks* What?!?  How did you get the impression that any
> such thing
> happened?  That Rahul, Spot and others worked along with
> the FSF to
> come up with those guidelines and to review licenses used
> in Fedora
> packages is nothing at all like the FSF just taking
> Fedora's
> guidelines.  Heck, Fedora even conflicts with those
> guidelines in
> important ways, both in policy and package set.  Why would
> anyone say
> Fedora is a Free distribution when it isn't?
We were fooled :(  Damn I was very convinced that Fedora followed all the rules, could you at least acknowledge that Fedora is 95% free or something along those lines.  IT is not all that BAD is it?
> 
> -- 

Regards,

Antonio