that old GNU/Linux argument

[max bianco]

2008/7/20 Mikkel L. Ellertson <mikkel at infinity-ltd.com>:
> Björn Persson wrote:
>>
>> Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
>>>
>>> Björn Persson wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Fedora isn't Linux, it's a Linux distribution, but everyone calls all
>>>> Linux distributions "Linux", so Fedora should be called "Linux" even
>>>> though it isn't Linux? Is that what you're saying? Unfortunately that
>>>> doesn't help much with defining what Linux *is*.
>>>>
>>>> Or do you mean that Fedora isn't *equal* to Linux, it's just *a* Linux,
>>>> but everyone calls all Linuxes "Linux"?
>>>
>>> It is kind of like the difference between a car, a Ford, and a
>>> Mustang. A car does not have to be a Ford to be a car. A Ford doea
>>> not have to be a Mustang. But it is still correct to call a Mustang
>>> a car.
>>
>> Should I take that to mean that your concept of "Linux" is the same as
>> Thomas Cameron's, whatever his concept really is?
>>
>> Björn Persson
>>
> No - just that I think the argument is equivalent is like complaining about
> someone calling a Mustang a car, instead of calling it a Ford Mustang.
> Calling a distribution Linux is less specific then calling it by the
> distribution name, but it is not less correct then calling a specific car by
> the generic name car.
>
I think the point being made is that Linux refers to the engine not
the car. Car refers to all the parts including the
seats,engine,tachometer, etc...





-- 
If opinions were really like assholes we'd each have just one