[lkml]   [1996]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: New sound maintainer?
On Sun, 21 Apr 1996, Alan Cox wrote:

> RMS is many things: Zealot, visionary, eccentric whatever. One thing I have
> no reason to believe he is or will be is underhand or dishonest. HURD is
Nothing personal, but the Linux/GNU debate has shown some interesting things
about the FSF and RMS. (Basically I've heard about it earlier, and even
sometimes used this term. This usage has ceased with that flame war :( )
Oh, and while the FSF produces nice and very good software, it has it's
problems like haveing an incompatible developement culture to Linux.
(Linus has key role for Linux BUT work on linux-kernel hasn't ceased,
while Linus was away, consider 1.3.59+mark, and now consider the GNU,
XFree86 model, etc.)
Additionally renaming offically Linux to Linux/GNU isn't really correct.
I cite from memory the RedHat manual, where it is stated that from 200MB
sources one third is GNU source, another third is X Consortium code, so
when you advocate Linux/GNU, then you have to advocate actually
Linux/GNU/XFree86 or whatsoever.

> a long going GNU thing (BTW when I was first on the net there were all sorts
> of 'hurd is too ambitious we should base it on UZI' type discussions. I
> think history has shown they should have, and we'd have been where Linux is
> now 5 years earlier).
Hmmm, really I would like to see hurd, as it seems that it Mach
fundaments would make better usage of mine SMP machine than the current
Linux SMP, but I've the impression that Hurd is at the moment Vaporware.
(if this is untrue, can someone give me a URL for downloading?)

> Suppose you had worked on FreeBSD for say 4 years, and someone came along and
> said "FreeBSD is crap Linux is the solution" - or vice versa - how would you
> react. Would the fact "xxx is great, we can dump the stuff you spent years on"
> is right make you feel any different ?
Right, but even then one shouldn't try to tag oneself one the
commercial more successful one. I believe that it would be easier (from
the popularity) to rename Linux to TC...OS (Torvalds,Cox,<fill in ...
with the letters for the developer you consider essential> OS, kind of
awk naming), than to Linux/GNU, especially as it have been brought
forward quite demanding.

PS.: Enough flameing, oh by the way: Which new Linux version is known to
work with IBCS?

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.045 / U:1.476 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site