Re: RMS comments: Gnome part of the GNU operating system.
RMS was quoted as saying:
> > > In 1991, GNU was almost finished, lacking only a kernel. Then
> > > Linus ...
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > Really, GNOME was already written in 1991? News to me! Or isn't
> > > GNOME part of the GNU system?
Marcus Brinkmann replied:
> > Hairsplitting. You can't find any reasonable point to attack, so
> > you grasp at this little thing. You just want to bicker, and not
> > contribute.
Hamish Moffatt replied:
> My point was that IMHO RMS is asking for too much credit. The
> statement that "In 1991, GNU was almost finished, lacking only a kernel"
> is incorrect. GNOME has evolved since then as the desktop for example.
Then by your argument, no OS is *ever* finished, since something might
be later added to it. Here, it's clear to me (and to anyone who bothers
to think about it) that by "finished," RMS's is referring to an
operating system that works and is self-sufficient. Lacking only a
kernel, GNU was indeed almost finished in 1991. History supports my
claim, since Linus later added a kernel, and a working operating system
was born.
> Similarly, as someone else has pointed out, the GNU system does not
> have a GNU windowing system, typesetting system, etc. Debian is not
> just GNU + kernel.
>
> The GNU project has contributed a lot to Debian and they deserve
> credit. We call it Debian GNU/Linux, for example. But there are
> lots of other major contributors too. So let's not devalue their
> contributions by promoting GNU too heavily.
Before you accuse anyone of getting too much credit, let's analyze the
dependencies of the operating system to see which parts are the *most*
important. Sure, windowing systems and typesetting systems are nice --
they add much to the value of an OS -- but they are not essential
components of the OS. It is easy to find a GNU/Linux system without X;
a windowing system is pretty useless on a headless node of a Beowulf
cluster doing nuclear calculations. It's also easy to find a GNU/Linux
system without TeX, since most Linux users probably don't know how to
use TeX.
Nevertheless, Linux could exist today without X, TeX, or many other
components that we consider "standard," but that are not truly
essential. Linux would not exist today without the work done first by
the GNU project. Not only did Linus make use of the GNU compilers to
build his kernel, he was also freed from the time-consuming task of
writing all of the little components that make up a Unix-like operating
system.
Therefore, the dependencies can be graphed as follows:
GNU ---> Linux ---> X
\--> TeX
\--> etc.
Finally, I realize that X, TeX, and other software were developed
independently of GNU and Linux. I am discussing the dependence of Linux
on these components, however, not vice versa.
- Brian
Reply to: