On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 11:32:02AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 04:21:32PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 10:19:39AM +0100, Ulrich Eckhardt wrote: > > >> Hmmm, I see another common thing there: if the OS-core where a proggy is > >> developed on is Linux, the program is called a Linux-program. Few people > >> really care to look at what they are using .... > > > Yes, first of all they forget to give GNU credit. You should not do > > that for RMS' ego, but because the project deserves it, they wrote a > > big part of the OS and made Linux possible. Also if nobody knows where > > some programs come from, they also can't see that they aren't actually > > maintained upstream (which is the case for some GNU utils). Besides > > those things, the GNU philosophy is also very useful and I've never > > seen something like that on the big "Linux" sites (or maybe I haven't > > looked carefully, that could also be the case). > > And confrontationally pointing this out to people every time they use > the word 'Linux' alone to refer to the OS is extremely anti-social. And still not giving credit to people who wrote the biggest part of the OS after being corrected isn't anti-social? > RMS > is a genius and a hermit. What's *your* excuse? There are people on IRC who call me "the Dutch RMS". Maybe that says enough about me. And is RMS really a hermit? > > Second, I wished it were only their words. In fact most programmers > > don't know or don't care about portability. The amount of Linuxisms in > > programs is very big, I think the amount of GNUisms is even bigger as > > most developers use the GNU tools and glibc to make their programs, > > they don't use Linux directly. > > Joining RMS's "what's in a name?" crusade isn't going to make most > programmers care about portability. In fact, NOTHING is going to make > most programmers care about portability, except when it's portability to > their own platform. Not saying what's the right name of their OS doesn't make a difference either. What's your point? > As someone who takes pains to make his code as > portable as possible, I can attest to the fact that writing portable > code SUCKS. It's a lot of work for very little gain. Although POSIX is broken, it's supported by most systems. At least the free ones should support it. I don't see why writing POSIX compatible code sucks. > And while you > can't force anyone to work on anything they don't want to in the Free > Software community, giving them a hard time for not supporting (or > crediting) your pet OS is a great way to trick them into /not/ doing the > work you want them to. Most Debian developers already care about the Hurd and/or BSD ports, I don't see a reason to force them. 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:
pgp5wXwpLsp0M.pgp
Description: PGP signature