From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Omar Radwan Subject: Re: When can we expect a version 1.0 of the GNU Operating System? Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 15:12:44 -0800 Message-ID: References: <546E0BC8.8090200@openmailbox.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8ff253143c95a20508527761 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54553) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xrau6-0000cr-LL for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 18:12:48 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xrau5-0000IY-BH for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 18:12:46 -0500 Received: from mail-ob0-x232.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4003:c01::232]:65454) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xrau5-0000IK-4P for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 18:12:45 -0500 Received: by mail-ob0-f178.google.com with SMTP id gq1so3064231obb.23 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 15:12:44 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Dave Crossland , guix-devel@gnu.org, felipe.lopez@openmailbox.org --e89a8ff253143c95a20508527761 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >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 wrote: > Hi > > Personal opinion only > > On 20 November 2014 15:42, Felipe L=C3=B3pez > 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 > --e89a8ff253143c95a20508527761 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

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

Guix is a=C2=A0distribution=C2=A0of GNU, so far the only=C2=A0dis= tribution=C2=A0than is officially under the umbrella of the GNU project.=C2= =A0


>Because this will incentivise people to say that = that "Acme Linux", referring to GNU+Linux, "is not GNU, beca= use GNU is only available >from=C2=A0gnu.org" which would be misleading.=C2=A0
>"= ;Acme GNU" or "GNU Acme" or "Acme GNU+Linux" are a= ll the GNU operating system.

Technical= ly, 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. =C2=A0


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

Personal opinion only

On 20 November 2014 15:42, Felipe L= =C3=B3pez <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 w= as released in the early 90s, with the Linux kernel substituted for HURD.
=C2=A0
why can't the resulting=
distribution be called The GNU Operating System (or GNU, for short)?
<= /blockquote>

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 misl= eading.

"Acme GNU" or &q= uot;GNU Acme" or "Acme GNU+Linux" are all the GNU operating = system.

--
Cheers
Dave

--e89a8ff253143c95a20508527761--