| 1 |
Carsten Lohrke posted <200601052030.36308.carlo@g.o>, excerpted |
| 2 |
below, on Thu, 05 Jan 2006 20:30:27 +0100: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Thursday 05 January 2006 16:46, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: |
| 5 |
>> Yeah ok, let me end up these holidays, and I'll prepare a written request |
| 6 |
>> to change the Linux part in something else |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> You should also contact the folks working on the gentoo.org redesign. While |
| 9 |
> there was a bit of fuss about the infinity symbol, I always wondered why no |
| 10 |
> one lost a word against the "Linux" below, given that we claim to provide a |
| 11 |
> meta-distribution. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Well, for that matter, "distribution" is considered at least by my *BSD |
| 14 |
friends, to be a peculiarly Linux term. From their perspective, Linux has |
| 15 |
1001 "distributions", but they only have the one *BSD they choose to use. |
| 16 |
They don't consider BSD fragmented, even with multiple "distributions" as |
| 17 |
it were, because each BSD is its own thing, yet at the same time, no Linux |
| 18 |
is its own thing, it's fragmented into 1001 "distributions". |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
So, while Gentoo is certainly more than Linux, even maintaining the |
| 21 |
"metadistribution" term in the definition, will be the same thing as |
| 22 |
keeping the "Linux", from the viewpoint of the many tending toward the BSD |
| 23 |
side of the FLOSS community. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
What word to use in place of "distribution", when one wants to include the |
| 26 |
BSDs and other "non-distributions" as well, other than |
| 27 |
Linux/BSD[/*ix]][/OSX], or simply *ix... *IS* there such a term? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 31 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 32 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in |
| 33 |
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives