that old GNU/Linux argument
olivares14031 at yahoo.com
Tue Jul 22 15:27:59 UTC 2008
> Bjorn, Linus really put the spin on this whole affair. So,
> I'm quoting
> him below. From my own perspective, there has been a bunch
> of history
> here, when RedHat released it's CD's labeled
> "Red Hat Linux" and the
> same with Caldera and their CD's with "Caldera
> Linux" written on the CD,
> etc. The wav file of Linus saying "I pronounce it
> LeeNuks" spread around
> the planet. Yet, I've never heard of Linus saying
> "you must" or "you
> should" or anything like that in that vein. To me,
> that is freedom,
> where your freedom ends at the tip of my nose.
> I personally prefer using the term "Linux" to
> describe the OS, the
> community, the mindset, the all encompassing rally to the
> sharing of all
> things computerese as opposed to "Windows" and
> that community, that OS,
> that mindset. Both come in many flavors. BSD comes in many
> flavors, and
> they also are a community, a mindset, as well as an OS.
> So, personally it comes down to who is my ideal, my guru,
> the person I'd
> rather be like and present as that to others. Linus, hands
> down. Again,
> it's personal and it's history. I first installed
> using the 9 floppy
> disk install set labeled "Slackware Linux". Then
> the first RedHat CD,
> labeled "RedHat Linux", which I mounted in my
> $500 CD player. Now we
> have FSF telling us to duck-march, rectify history, and
> give Stallman
> the power to "remind" us what to do and think?
> We've been morally WRONG
> all this time? Bullpucky. Here's Linus's take on
> On Sat, 16 Dec 2006, karderio wrote:
> > If the "free software community" has the
> clout to twist vendor's arms to
> > get them release driver source, then I'm all for
> I don't care what you're for, or what your
> imaginary "free software
> community" is for.
> We're "open source", and we're not a
> religion. We don't "twist peoples
> arms". We show people what we think is a better way,
> and we let them
> participate. We don't force it, we don't twist it,
> and it's ok not to
> believe in the GPL or our ideals. In fact, "our
> ideals" aren't even one
> unified thing to begin with.
> We also don't try to pervert copyright into a "you
> have to _use_ things
> in a certain way". We don't think "fair
> use" is a bad thing. We encourage
> it, and that means that we have to abide by it ourselves.
> It means, most
> particularly, that even people we disagree with have that
> right of "fair
> That, btw, is what "freedom" and
> "rights" are all about. It's only
> meaningful when you grant those rights to people you
> don't agree with.
> Also, since you haven't apparently gotten the memo yet,
> let me point it
> out to you: the end results don't justify the means,
> and never did. So
> arm-twisting doesn't become good just because you think
> the end result
> might be worth it. It's still bad.
> And btw, that "information freedom" thing you
> talked about is just so much
> blather and idiotic hogwash. "Information"
> doesn't want to be free, nor is
> it something you should fight for or necessarily even
> It doesn't hold a candle to _peoples_ freedom, the
> foremost of which is to
> just disagree with you. Once you allow people to talk and
> do what they
> want, that "information freedom" will follow.
> It's not a religion, and it's not about suppressing
> other people and other
> That is a man that I can follow. So, I'll redouble my
> personal efforts
> to use the name "Linux" as "GNU/Linux"
> ain't as free and asks, if not
> demands, a price ...according to my perceptions.
> Can I get an Amen? Ric
Amen, Amen, and a Hallelujah!!!
Both Linux and GNU are important much like man is to woman, one without the other would cease to exist, but the general public has exerted its name Linux, Debian uses Debian/GNU Linux, and some others as well. Maybe Presidential Candidate Obama can help some that want the change, after all his motto is change?
More information about the fedora-list