Re: why bookworm isn't called deb12?

[jeremy ardley <jeremy.ardley@gmail.com>]

On 7/7/23 21:05, jeremy ardley wrote:
> On 7/7/23 20:47, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> > What MS has done has never been relevant to the creation of GNU, X, or
> > the Linux kernel.
>
>
> Agreed, those technologies were mostly independent of anything 
> Microsoft has done.
>
> GNU is a clone of Unix so a derivative. MS is also a derivative but 
> not much like Unix.
>
> Note Windows NT was built to be Posix compliant which is a Unix 
> derived standard.
>
> X is a product well left alone by MS.
>
> The Linux Kernel is one of several options including at least one GNU 
> kernel. All are designed to run under a GNU framework.
>
> One option I've not seen yet is a MS kernel running with a GNU 
> framework. It's entirely feasible, but unlikely to date.

My error:

I should have said

"Linux is a clone of Unix so a derivative. MS is also a derivative but 
not much like Unix. "

I should also have noted FreeBSD and other clones of Unix that also rely 
on a GNU framework