Re: When can we expect a version 1.0 of the GNU Operating System?

Re: When can we expect a version 1.0 of the GNU Operating System?

[Omar Radwan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1914 bytes --]

>I came across GNU Guix [1] last year. At that time, they had plans to
>build a standalone distribution of the GNU Operating System. I watched
>GNU Guix developers work during this year and they did build a
>standalone distribution. [2] But the name of this distribution is GNU
>Guix (the same name of the package manager). If Guix is the GNU package
>manager and integrates the components of GNU, why can't the resulting
>distribution be called The GNU Operating System (or GNU, for short)? [3]

Guix is a distribution of GNU, so far the only distribution than is
officially under the umbrella of the GNU project.


>Because this will incentivise people to say that that "Acme Linux",
referring to GNU+Linux, "is not GNU, because GNU is only available >from
gnu.org" which would be misleading.
>"Acme GNU" or "GNU Acme" or "Acme GNU+Linux" are all the GNU operating
system.

Technically, its not GNU, it's GNU/Linux, GNU is running on top of Linux.
But if GNU was running on HURD, I think it would just be called GNU because
HURD is part of GNU.


On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Dave Crossland <dave@lab6.com> wrote:

> Hi
>
> Personal opinion only
>
> On 20 November 2014 15:42, Felipe López <felipe.lopez@openmailbox.org>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'd like to know what is
>> holding the GNU developers back from releasing the first version of the
>> GNU Operating System.
>>
>
> It was released in the early 90s, with the Linux kernel substituted for
> HURD.
>
>
>> why can't the resulting
>> distribution be called The GNU Operating System (or GNU, for short)?
>>
>
> Because this will incentivise people to say that that "Acme Linux",
> referring to GNU+Linux, "is not GNU, because GNU is only available from
> gnu.org" which would be misleading.
>
> "Acme GNU" or "GNU Acme" or "Acme GNU+Linux" are all the GNU operating
> system.
>
> --
> Cheers
> Dave
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4667 bytes --]

Re: When can we expect a version 1.0 of the GNU Operating System?

[Dave Crossland]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 180 bytes --]

On 20 November 2014 23:12, Omar Radwan <toxemicsquire4@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think it would just be called GNU because HURD is part of GNU.


People already say "Debian GNU/Hurd"

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 511 bytes --]

Re: When can we expect a version 1.0 of the GNU Operating System?

[Bruno Félix Rezende Ribeiro]

Em Thu, 20 Nov 2014 15:12:44 -0800
Omar Radwan <toxemicsquire4@gmail.com> escreveu:

> Guix is a distribution of GNU, so far the only distribution than is
> officially under the umbrella of the GNU project.

Guix is *not* a distribution of GNU; rather, it's the package manager
of GNU.  There is, however, a GNU project's distribution of the GNU
system which the Guix team is working on.  The Guix team folks are the
first ones to work on such distribution because packaging and
distributing are normally intrinsically related tasks.

> Technically, its not GNU, it's GNU/Linux, GNU is running on top of
> Linux. But if GNU was running on HURD, I think it would just be
> called GNU because HURD is part of GNU.

GNU running on top of GNU Linux-libre is technically GNU, if that is a
GNU project's distribution.  That's our view.


-- 
 ,= ,-_-. =.  Bruno Félix Rezende Ribeiro (oitofelix) [0x28D618AF]
((_/)o o(\_)) There is no system but GNU;
 `-'(. .)`-'  GNU Linux-Libre is one of its official kernels;
     \_/      All software must be free as in freedom;