Re: "MIT/GNU/Linux"

[Matthew Flaschen]

Tim X wrote:
> 
> Now for some final clarification - at what point does GNU/Linux become
> something other than GNU/Linux? For example, I would expect a
> distribution like Debian is certainly of the GNU/Linux variety.
> However, what about Red Hat and SuSe? 

Of course.  They are using the same basic tools and software as Debian.

Possibly even more unclear, what
> about the distribution Oracle is planning to release as the supported
> platform for their Oracle databases, can you also call this GNU/Linux? 

Even more obvious.  Oracle's product is nothing but Red Hat Enterprise
Linux repackaged.

> If there are some distributions which are GNU/Linux and some which are
> not, what is the generic name used to refer to all of them
> collectively (i.e. in the sense of Unix or *nix)? 

Linux distributions, but you will not find a major distribution that
doesn't rely on GNU.  Only a few embedded systems use the kernel alone.

> I also gather from listening to RMS and from some reading that we
> should also avoid referring to GNU software as open source, but
> instead as "Free Software".

RMS started the movement and the GNU Project and that is the term he
chose to associate with both.

Matthew Flaschen

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature