Re: "MIT/GNU/Linux"

[Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>]

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 15:59:39 +0200,
"Micha Feigin" <michf@post.tau.ac.il> wrote:
>B. Smith-Mannschott wrote:
>>On Dec 29, 2006, at 02:12, Leo wrote:
>>> In every emacs-* mailing lists, it has been extremely consistent to
>>> use Linux and GNU/Linux i.e. Linux means the kernel and GNU/Linux
>>> is the operating system that contains a Linux kernel.
>
> The operating system is the kernel.

I have to respectfully disagree.  A kernel without the userland tools to
make good use of it is pretty much useless.

> GNU is one of the more popular option (but not the only one) for the
> tools running over the operating system. I think GNU/Linux is just RMS
> being overly pushy and and egomaniac.

No, RMS is right.

First of all, there are other examples where "parts" have a different
name from the "whole".  Consider for example the fine difference between
"SunOS" and "The Solaris Operating Environment" :)

Secondly, it may be cool to say that "Linux is only the kernel", but
this is a relatively strange way of looking at things.  You can't really
"boot" a standalong Linux kernel without the support of the myriad of
tools people have grafted on top of it.  A functional, and *complete*
operating environment -- at least from the perspective of the end user
-- includes both the Linux kernel *and* the surrounding tools.

Giorgos