Linux or GNU/Linux

[Dave Ihnat]

Once, long ago--actually, on Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 09:05:51PM -0700--Gordon Messmer (yinyang at eburg.com) said:
> That's a load of hooey.  GNU the project provides a collection of
> Free Software, but GNU the operating system existed before Linux.
> The goal was an implementation of the POSIX operating system
> specification.

With all due respect, nonsense.  Richard wanted a full reimplementation
of Unix, including the kernel.  He was quite successful at getting
volunteers to carry out the implementation of commands, libraries,
etc.--I know, I did 'cut' & 'paste'.

However, the kernel was far less successful.  Despite the claims
of "superior architecture", Hurd has never caught on; almost every
implementation you'll run into (I'd say 'every', but someone would come
up with John Drutin's Distro as a counter-example) uses the Linux kernel
and GNU libraries and utilities.  Read the Wikipedia article on "GNU Hurd".

Richard Stallman wants people to acknowledge the contribution GNU has made
to the success of the Linux distributions by refering to them collectively
as "GNU/Linux".  People tend to go for the shortest term that conveys a
meaning, so the vast majority of people simply call it "Linux", and those
who know understand that the GNU utilities, commands, and libraries are
included.

Cheers,
--
	Dave Ihnat
	dihnat at dminet.com