On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 02:35:04AM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote: > I've added a webpage (http://debian-bsd.sourceforge.net/why.html) with > some reasons why I think this project is worthwhile. Does anyone have any > objection to any of the reasons listed or have any suggestions for extra > ones that can be added? A nitpicking thing: It's "the Debian GNU/Hurd project", not "the Debian Hurd project." I think there are some other things to add: * Debian gets more portable and the maintainers learn about portability. Most of the time the changes are sent upstream, the upstream software also gets more portable. (This might be added to the port to other kernel thing). * We've the same Debian interface for a lot of kernels: Linux, the Hurd (it isn't really a kernel, but a kernel-replacement however) and *BSD. Think about the Debian installer asking "What kernel do you want to install?" > On a related note, I've been wondering about the GNUishness of this. In > contrast to GNU/Linux, we're quite conspicuously not using the GNU C > library, and a few other bits and pieces that would be GNU on a Linux > system are BSD on ours. Apart from that a lot ofthings come from GNU and they they deserve credit, there is also another reason. It's spreading the words of freedom. The GNU website talks about freedom and why software should be free. I don't see this on the big "Linux" websites nor do I see it on the *BSD websites (I don't know all those website very well, so correct me if I'm wrong). That's also one of the reasons RMS wants people to call it "GNU/Linux" instead of "Linux". If everybody know why software would be free and if all software was free, RMS would probably never cared about not mentioning GNU and just calling that OS "Linux". It's the thing most people forget in the "GNU/Linux" vs. "Linux" debate. > 1) The rest of the fundamental userland is still GNU. Is this enough to > warrant calling it GNU/NetBSD? Yes > 2) Were we to call it GNU/NetBSD, would this be likely to be perceived as > insulting by the NetBSD community? On the one hand it might sound like a > grab by the GPL movement, but on the other hand it does clearly > acknowledge the NetBSD contribution and differentiates it further from > "true" NetBSD I think it's a good thing that there is a clear distinction between Debian GNU/NetBSD and the actual NetBSD project. I don't think the NetBSD community would like to be confused with the Debian community. > 3) Were we to fail to call it GNU/NetBSD, would we stand any chance > whatsoever of getting it into Debian proper? I don't know, but we should just call it GNU/NetBSD IMHO. It's also fit nicely, i.e. Debian GNU/Linux, Debian GNU/Hurd, Debian GNU/NetBSD. > My personal preference would probably be for GNU/NetBSD, but at the same > time I have no desire whatsoever for us to end up alienated from the > NetBSD people who have provided such useful advice so far. Comments? Reading other mails on the list the NetBSD people don't have much problems with it. Jeroen Dekkers -- Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org IRC: jeroen@openprojects
Attachment:
pgp2lDxNsy7tS.pgp
Description: PGP signature