Re: gnu vs. xemacs

[Matthew Flaschen]

Tim X wrote:
> You don't think your being a bit pedantic do you? After all, Linux is
> what GNU/Linux is commonly called. You also have lots of other
> references out there which don't include the "GNU" part, such as The
> Linux Journal, the Linux Gazette, Linux Weekly news,
> linuxquestions.org, linuxkernel.org, etc etc.

> At least if your going to take the time to post a response, maybe add
> something for the OP in addition to correcting his colloquial use of
> Linux rather than the technically correct one.

I don't think he's being pedantic, and the fact that the error is common
does not mean it's insignificant.  It's not only technically correct,
it's ethically correct.

As for the OP, I can't help since I've never used XEmacs.

Matt Flaschen

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature