Re: [OFFTOPIC] RMS and reactions to him

Chris Funderburg
2003-01-14T21:42:22Z

Mark Mielke wrote:
<clipped>
> In actual fact, I don't want RMS to stop.

Well, he "hasn't stopped" in years:

************************************************************************
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 10:49:16 -0600 (CST)
Reply-To: lilo <TaRDiS@mail.utexas.edu>
To: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.ai.mit.edu>
cc: alan@cymru.net, ganderson@clark.net, linux-misc@vger.rutgers.edu,
linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
Subject: Re: Linux isn't an operating system
Sender: owner-linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
Precedence: bulk

isn't there an advocacy newsgroup for gnu software? this is pretty clearly
off-topic. speaking from my own experience, it's very easy to get caught up
in an advocacy thread, even when that thread is clearly off-topic. :) i
also suspect that it will continue to generate flames as long as the
originator keeps pursuing it here. ;)

lilo

On Wed, 6 Mar 1996, Richard Stallman wrote:

> I think I should explain the difference between "GNU software" and
> "the GNU operating system". It would be inaccurate to say that a
> system such Slackware consists mainly of GNU software, but correct I
> believe to say it is mostly the same as the GNU system.
>
> I started the GNU project in 1984 with the aim of making a complete
> free Unix-like operating system. I wrote some parts myself--GCC,
> Emacs, GDB, and other smaller ones. Other people wrote other
> components for the GNU project. These programs are GNU software.
>
> We also added to the GNU system some programs like X Windows and parts
> of BSD which were written by other projects. These programs are not
> GNU software, but they are parts of the GNU system (and parts of other
> systems as well). When Linux was written, the GNU system was almost
> complete, but lacking a kernel. Putting the incomplete GNU system
> together with Linux realized my dream of a free operating system.
>
> In principle, there's no reason why a system based on Linux has to be
> a variant GNU system, and perhaps some of them are not. But as far as
> I know, most of them currently are.
>
> To speak of "Linux Based MIT X Windows/GNU/BSD/MIT systems" would be
> correct. But people may find it impractical. The term "Linux-based
> GNU system" is also correct, and it is practical.
>
> By using this term, we can help encourage people to work together
> instead of dividing themselves artificially into "Linux users" and
> "GNU users". This solves an important practical problem.
>