Re: Fw: Re: [gentoo-dev] Dist name...

[Jean-Michel Smith]

On Wednesday 07 August 2002 07:00 am, Fredrik Jagenheim wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 07, 2002 at 12:49:00AM +0200, Spider wrote:
> > Now, making this the holy war that we are ungrateful bastards who steal
> > the hard work from the GNU foundation and use it to promote our own
> > selfish selves ... ermh.
> >
> > should we perhaps place the gratitude to all developers directly there
> > as well?  hmm...
>
> I just witnessed this flamewar on another mailinglist, and one of the
> better comments about this whole mess was that it's quite interesting
> that RMS demands that GNU is used in the name, while refusing to give
> credits to the BSD people:
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html

First, I think people should call their Linux (GNU/Linux) systems whatever 
they like (which is why I am a proponent of dual naming the distro to put the 
argument behind us once and for all), but the argument you cite is misleading 
and just plain wrong.

The argument the FSF had with the advertising clause of the old BSD license 
has absolutely nothing to do with their REQUEST (not demand) that people 
refer to Linux as GNU/Linux, their problem was the INCOMPATABILITY that 
clause created with other free licenses (not just the GPL), limiting the 
reusability of the BSD code.

You'll notice that there is no clause in the GPL requiring the use of the 
prefix "GNU," nor is there ever likely to be one (and if there ever is, I'll 
join you as one of the loudest critics of such a move). 

After a great deal of discussion and debate (I waded through several old 
USENET threads on the subject at google after reading your post) the BSD 
folks agreed, and changed their license accordingly.

This has nothing, whatsoever, to do with their request to prefix Linux with 
GNU.  The fact remains that the core operating system consists of the kernel, 
some basic libraries, a shell, and some basic command line utilities.  For 
nearly the entire 12 years Linux has been around, over 90% of this code has 
been GNU code.  Not BSD code (as the argument seems to imply, particuarly to 
anyone who doesn't follow the link and actually read it).  

RMSes request really isn't that unreasonable, particularly if you set aside 
your dislike of the guy long enough to read (or listen, many of his speeches 
are available as mp3 or ogg files online) WHY he makes that request (hint: it 
isn't self aggrandizement).

Now, yes, we can retroactively replace all GNU tools with their BSD 
equivelents, if in order to ignore RMSes request that is what we have to do 
to feel comfortable with that decision, but frankly that is a rather asinine 
approach to take (and wasteful to boot ... most of the GNU tools are handier 
to use than their BSD equivelents, and one of the first things I do on a 
FreeBSD box is install the GNU toolsets).  Furthermore, retrofiting a Linux 
installation to not use GNU components doesn't change the fact in the least 
that, for the first 12 years of the project it was mostly GNU software that 
made up the core of what is the UNIX-like operating system we call Linux.

As I've said before, I find this entire debate somewhat silly ... people 
should call it whatever they are comfortable calling it, and people on both 
sides of the argument make valid points to support their point of view.

The argument you cite, however, isn't one of them, nor is the "most software 
on my system is third party user software like KDE, so I should just call it 
KDE."  You don't call your windows operating system your "Office 2000" system 
do you, or your "Word Perfect" system (if you're a lawyer still using that 
software).

Spiders argument is actually one of two cognizant one's I've seen in this 
thread ... until he starts going off on a tangent about other third party, 
non-core operating system applications on his Gentoo system.

Python IS a core part of the Gentoo distribution (you can't install gentoo 
without it) ... so his point about not calling it Python/GNU/Linux is the 
first time I've seen the "but I've got other third party software on my 
system" argument used where it ACTUALLY make sense, but only as it is limited 
to Python.

The other good argument is that 'Linux' IS just shorthand for GNU/Linux, a 
stance that is imminently compatible with my 'dual naming convention' 
proposal.

In any event, Gentoo is just that, Gentoo.  Whether you call it Gentoo 
GNU/Linux or Gentoo Linux is up to you (I usually forget and call it the 
latter, even though I try to remember and toss the GNU in on occasion, out of 
respect for RMS), but please don't propogate erroneous arguments like the one 
you just cited.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.  Linux, and Free Software in 
general, is about software freedom and software excellence.  We should IMHO 
promote both of these concepts as much as possible, and to my way of thinking 
having two official names, one respecting RMSes wishes and one respecting the 
wishes of the opposing camp, and letting people use whichever one they are 
most comfortable with, seems to be the best compromise one can make that 
actually promotes this freedom of choice.

It is interesting to note the RMS even stated, explicitly, in a speech he gave 
at the University of Chicago, that people are FREE to disregard his request 
to prefix Linux with GNU when talking about the entire distribution, and that 
he is more concerned with promoting and defending that freedom than he is 
with the GNU prefix itself (though it is exactly the promotion of those 
ideals that is behind his request in the first place ... there are enough 
levels of irony in all this to amuse anyone I think).

In any event, I for one am pleased to see that this discussion has not 
degenerated to a flame war, despite people's obvious strong feelings on the 
matter on both sides.  The level of courtesy and respect I've seen maintained 
here, even when discussing heated issues like this one, is one of the things 
I find really pleasant about the gentoo community.

Jean.