Re: Crash on loading image

[Kim F. Storm]

address@hidden (Pavel Janík) writes:

>    From: Richard Stallman <address@hidden>
>    Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 16:46:05 -0700 (MST)
> 
> Richard,
> 
>    >     note, that some Linux distributors - like SuSE - have also 
> libungif-4.1.0
>    > 
>    > Thanks for helping to collect these test cases.  While you are at it,
>    > would you please not call those companies "Linux distributors".  What
>    > they distribute is much more GNU than Linux, and giving "Linux" 100%
>    > of the credit hurts the GNU Project.
> 
> I know your arguments. I think all people here know your arguments so it is
> pointless to discuss this on this mailing-list.
> 
> But do you really think that they distribute more GNU than Linux? 

If you take the good ol' UNIX V7 and BSD manuals, man(1) to man(8),
you can say that Linux covers man(2) and man(7), and GNU covers the
rest.  So it is fair to talk about a GNU/Linux system for the base
operating system, and that GNU is a considerable part of that.

Add to that, that Linus has contrinuted Linux to GNU as (one of) the
kernels for building a complete GNU system.  

So if GNU tells you that the proper term for a GNU system with Linux
as the kernel is GNU/Linux, then I think you - as a contibuter to GNU
- should respect that.

> Should I then refer to SuSE as commercial Linux/XFree/Sun/GNU distributor?

No, you can refer to SuSE as a commercial GNU/Linux, XFree, KDE, and
StarOffice distributor.

I don't know what the KDE and SUN developers think about their efforts
being viewed as "components of Linux".  The GNU project obviously
doesn't want to be viewed that way.


> If you think that GNU project tends to be forgotten in people's minds,
> something *should* be done. But saying half-truth to them is not correct
> and can turn against GNU project in the future. I do not want to be there
> when this happens...

In my mind, there is *less* "half-truth" about calling it GNU/Linux
than just Linux!!!

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk