On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 10:56:33AM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 06:05:36PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > I've got to say that calling the Hurd section the ``GNU specific annex'',
> > is very confusing. If you want to call an OS running the Hurd kernel
> > "GNU" then we need to drop "GNU/" from our released architectures. Having
> > "GNU" standards not apply to a "GNU/Linux" distribution is ridiculously
> > confusing.
> The name in the annex probably can be clarified, but I don't see your
> conclusions as inevitable.
If there's to be a "Linux" specific annex, and a "GNU" specific annex,
why would you expect "Debian GNU/Linux" to follow the former but not
the latter?
(By comparison, we don't really care if people follow the Linux coding
standards (linux/Documentation/CodingStyle) or the GNU coding standards,
so there's no real confusion to be had there)
If you want to consider Linux-based systems "GNU systems", then it's not
reasonable to go around calling Hurd-based systems "*the* GNU system".
It's too complicated, it's too confusing, and it's too prone to error.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``BAM! Science triumphs again!''
-- http://www.angryflower.com/vegeta.gif
Attachment:
pgpA1zxbpGsl5.pgp
Description: PGP signature