Re: GNU within the name (Was: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s))
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> Debian NetBSD
> The Debian user land with the NetBSD kernel and core system
> running on an i386. Again this could be "Debian NetBSD/NetBSD"
> except I dislike repetition.
I don't think that is ever suggested. None of the Debian developers seem
to plan to have NetBSD core system included.
> I don't see why what version of 'ls' gets put in the stable distribution
> this week has any relevance on the overall name.
NetBSD's ls has different switches and slightly different output
formatting than coreutils' ls. Most noticable is the missing
getopt_long(3) style options.
> There are far more
> important components to the system, such as the init method, package
> management, etc. which if they were changed would cause severe user
That is true. And that is what mostly makes Debian, Debian.
> If we replaced the various GNU utilities with (say) BSD ones, how many
> people would really notice? Most people think we provide GNU awk as the
I am no colorls fan, but many will notice lack of color in NetBSD's
BSD's use jot instead of seq.
BSD's use "tail -r" instead of tac.
NetBSD doesn't have "cp -r" (with small "r").
Many, many minor differences (and again most noticable is lack of long
Again none of this matters, since the normal Debian packages are used.
(By the way, I use NetBSD's pkgsrc and NetBSD's rcNG rc.d style scripts
Jeremy C. Reed
echo '9,J8HD,fDGG8B@?:536FC5=8@I;C5?@H5B0D@5GBIELD54DL>@8L?:5GDEJ8LDG1' |\
sed ss,s50EBsg | tr 0-M 'p.wBt SgiIlxmLhan:o,erDsduv/cyP'