Re: Renaming the LSB? (was: Re: Specification v 0.8)
Jim Knoble wrote:
>
> Circa 2001-Apr-30 14:06:00 -0400 dixit Stuart Anderson:
>
> : On Mon, 30 Apr 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> :
> : > Fundamentally its a specification about a set of behaviours. Not
> : > who wrote which bits of the existing implementation. Its arguable
> : > that the 'Linux' bit is in part inappropriate
> :
> : I'm open to suggestions for a word that starts with the letter 'L',
> : and means ubiquitous. So far, all I've come up with is
> : "Level-playing-field" 8-).
I'm in favor of having L stand for LSB, as Peter suggested.
This is in the grand tradition of GNU, so RMS will surely be happy!
- Dan
Reply to: