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
> shock.
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
> default.
I am no colorls fan, but many will notice lack of color in NetBSD's
native ls(1).
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
options).
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
for Linux.)
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'
Reply to: