Re: What OS is used By Richard Stallman

[mike3]

On Jan 14, 6:32 pm, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote:
> nicolas vigier <bo...@mars-attacks.org> writes:
> > On 2008-01-03, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <r...@1407.org> wrote:
>
> >> What he asks is for people to not call the whole operating system as
> >> Linux, which is a common mistake as 99.999% of the time people are
> >> talking about a GNU variant to which was added the Linux kernel.
>
> > This not a mistake, this is just a name. And a name doesn't have to
> > reflect all the things which are included inside it. Most people seems
> > to like the "Linux distribution" name, everybody understands that it
> > means the Linux kernel and many other things,
>
> But those many other things are not arbitrary.  You dont' let yourself
> be rechristened by your tailor, even though you are not fit for running
> around naked, do you?
>
> > and I see no reason to change that name to something else that is not
> > as easy to say just because RPMS decides so.
>
> Uh, GNU was there first.  So why should people decide to rename it when
> it was done in the compass of a different project?  

That's right, the majority component of the system is GNU.
So then it seems only to make sense that GNU should be
in the name.

> Why is it ok to
> bereave the GNU project of the credit for its work?  

Credit can be given in other places beside _names_.
The idea it must be given in the name and in no other
place doesn't really make much sense.

> And why is it
> uncool if the project leaders decide that they want to have their work
> known as their work?
>

And by their name, of course.