[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 11:03:08 +0000 Matt Lee wrote:
The group writing the GNU operating system are the FSF. The Operating system is GNU, but you generally use Linux, but you won't always have to, so you could call GNU/Linux GNU if you want. The only confusion is the idea that GNU is *just* a set of tools - it's not. It's a whole bunch of things, including tools that make up an operating system.
When is GNU going to produce a kernel to make a full operating system? As far as I was aware, HURD is a GNU project, therefore you would have GNU/HURD. If GNU *alone* is to be an operating system it needs a GNU kernel. Not a Linux kernel, not a HURD kernel, not a BSD kernel, not a Darwin kernel, etc, a GNU kernel. Mat Lee wrote earlier:
GNU is an OS
Grant Sewell wrote earlier:
you can't have an OS without a kernel
This is where the confusion lies. People saying that GNU is an OS, when there is no GNU kernel. There are many kernels that rely on "the GNU system", ie all the tools by GNU, but there is no such thing (currently) as "GNU the OS". It may well be that some people's preference is to call the OS by it's major component parts, ie GNU/Linux, GNU/HURD, etc, but this can, does and indeed will continue to confuse many newcomers because they are not used to this naming convention. It is not called MacOSX/Darwin, Explorer/Windows, QNX/Mach, etc. I am not saying by any means what-so-ever that such a naming convention is wrong... for God sake, I use it! What I am saying is that to call GNU an Operating System *now* is wrong. GNU is not. GNU is the (first/second... delete as appropriate) major component that comprises an OS. £0.02 Grant. -- Artificial intelligence is no match for nuratal stidutipy. -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.