[Sheflug] Of the naming of Linux

["Chris J" <xxxxx [at] xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

There's been a quite long "discussion" that started in comp.unix.admin, and 
was crossposted to a few other groups including advocacy and GNU groups 
shortly after. In short, it started off as an innocent question "what's the
difference between Linux and UNIX", and went downhill from there...

But it did raise a (potentially?) interesting question. As is known, RMS 
would prefer Linux to be known as GNU/Linux, but many people seem to reject 
that this is the case, citing that there is just as much, if not more, MIT
-licensed/derived or BSD-lisenced/derived work. Counter points that Linux 
would be nothing without GNU were countered that Linux could work without
GNU, and thus it went on.

It did also split into a sub-thread of "how do you define an operating 
system", but I can't remember how far that got...

The thread I think has now ended, having not seen a post to it for a couple 
of days. But I thought I'd raise it here, either for discussion, or for 
complete rubbishing :)

The entire thread can be found in comp.unix.admin and/or 
comp.unix.questions, and has the following details, for those that want to 
dig into it further. Does get rather flamey.

	Message-ID: <25fc8d92.0206150829.2aba827b [at] posting.google.com>
	From: Lily
	Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.admin
	Subject: Difference between Unix and Linux?
	Date: 15 Jun 2002 09:29:09 -0700

Chris...

-- 
\ Chris Johnson           \ NP: Heart - 04. These Dreams
 \ cej [at] nightwolf.org.uk    ~-----,   
  \ http://cej.nightwolf.org.uk/  ~-----------------------------------, 
   \ Redclaw chat - http://redclaw.org.uk - telnet redclaw.org.uk 2000 \____


___________________________________________________________________

Sheffield Linux User's Group -
http://www.sheflug.co.uk/mailfaq.html

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.