Richard Stallman: Why “GNU’S Not Linux” and Why We Should “Say LiGNUx”

Richard Stallman: Why “GNU’S Not Linux” and Why We Should “Say LiGNUx”

[Liam Lindholm]

Dear fellow Linux kernel hackers:

It has come to my attention that Richard M. Stallman, founder of the
Free Software Foundation and creator of the GNU project, has once
again set out to fragment our grassroots community.

Recently, Mr. Stallman has started a new push for acknowledgement of
GNU in Linux. No, not the familiar “GNU/Linux” that we're all sick and
tired of hearing about but, instead, a failed anagram of these same
terms. The campaign is called “Say LiGNUx” and demands that users of
any Linux-kernel operating system employing GNU software (which
comprises less than 15% of most modern Linux distributions nowadays)
call the operating system “LiGNUx.”

His presentation on the “Say LiGNUx” campaign is served in PNG format
at http://imgur.com/a/beY7E so you can see the insanity for yourself.

Yes, that's right. LiGNUx, pronounced like “pig cooks,” would be the
name of choice for our work in the last two decades. Stallman suggests
that we trash our existing name recognition and all common sense to
adopt his academic linguistic exercise in masturbatory politics that
represents the kernel's license and some poorly-built utilities that
no one uses anymore.

Mr. Stallman even suggests that users who refuse to say LiGNUx should
instead install GNU/HURD so as to remove any ambiguity about licenses
and nomenclature. What the hell?!

When is the last time someone named their operating system after the
license the kernel is released under? Such an esoteric naming method
is madness. Should Apple call OS X “Apple/XNU?” Or how about the
Berkeley operating systems? Should they call their products “FreeBSD”
or “OpenBSD?” Should Microsoft call their operating system “Microsoft
Windows?” The suggestion is patently absurd.

We should not give in to the wailing demands of this zealotry. Mr.
Stallman clearly needs a break from promoting an increasingly
irrelevant software platform. Perhaps that means banning him from
LKML, or asking Linus to suggest some vacation therapy for poor Mr.
Stallman and his zealotry, or having the Linux Foundation issue a
press release distancing themselves from RMS, GNU, and the Free
Software Foundation.

Whatever the next course of action is, we should all ignore Mr.
Stallman and continue to call Linux as Linux.

I am interested to hear your thoughts on the topic, fellow Linux kernel hackers.

Merry Christmas.

Liam Oskar Lindholm,
Linux Kernel Hacker

Re: Richard Stallman: Why “GNU’S Not Linux” and Why We Should “Say LiGNUx”

[Austin S Hemmelgarn]

On 2013-12-23 12:01, Liam Lindholm wrote:
> Dear fellow Linux kernel hackers:
> 
> It has come to my attention that Richard M. Stallman, founder of the
> Free Software Foundation and creator of the GNU project, has once
> again set out to fragment our grassroots community.
> 
> Recently, Mr. Stallman has started a new push for acknowledgement of
> GNU in Linux. No, not the familiar “GNU/Linux” that we're all sick and
> tired of hearing about but, instead, a failed anagram of these same
> terms. The campaign is called “Say LiGNUx” and demands that users of
> any Linux-kernel operating system employing GNU software (which
> comprises less than 15% of most modern Linux distributions nowadays)
> call the operating system “LiGNUx.”
As much as I hate to point this out, that less than 15% comprises most
of the big mainstream distros (eg, Suse, Red Hat, Fedora, Debian,
Ubuntu, Gentoo, etc.).
> 
> His presentation on the “Say LiGNUx” campaign is served in PNG format
> at http://imgur.com/a/beY7E so you can see the insanity for yourself.
[...snip...]
> Mr. Stallman even suggests that users who refuse to say LiGNUx should
> instead install GNU/HURD so as to remove any ambiguity about licenses
> and nomenclature. What the hell?!
I'd say that this is even stupider than the LiGNUx, Hurd only runs on
32-bit x86, doesn't support a large majority of modern hardware, and
trying to install it is comparable to trying to get a rebate from
Microsoft for not using a pre-installed copy of Windows.
> 
> When is the last time someone named their operating system after the
> license the kernel is released under? Such an esoteric naming method
> is madness. Should Apple call OS X “Apple/XNU?” Or how about the
> Berkeley operating systems? Should they call their products “FreeBSD”
> or “OpenBSD?” Should Microsoft call their operating system “Microsoft
> Windows?” The suggestion is patently absurd.
> 
> We should not give in to the wailing demands of this zealotry. Mr.
> Stallman clearly needs a break from promoting an increasingly
> irrelevant software platform. Perhaps that means banning him from
> LKML, or asking Linus to suggest some vacation therapy for poor Mr.
> Stallman and his zealotry, or having the Linux Foundation issue a
> press release distancing themselves from RMS, GNU, and the Free
> Software Foundation.
I'd personally say the press release is probably best.  Mr. Stallman's
zealotry makes all free software developers look bad, yet he dosen't
seem to realize that.

Re: Richard Stallman: Why “GNU’S Not Linux” and Why We Should “Say LiGNUx”

[Martin Nybo Andersen]

On Monday 23 December 2013 12:01:06 Liam Lindholm wrote:
> Dear fellow Linux kernel hackers:
> 
> It has come to my attention that Richard M. Stallman, founder of the
> Free Software Foundation and creator of the GNU project, has once
> again set out to fragment our grassroots community.
> 
> Recently, Mr. Stallman has started a new push for acknowledgement of
> GNU in Linux. No, not the familiar “GNU/Linux” that we're all sick and
> tired of hearing about but, instead, a failed anagram of these same
> terms. The campaign is called “Say LiGNUx” and demands that users of
> any Linux-kernel operating system employing GNU software (which
> comprises less than 15% of most modern Linux distributions nowadays)
> call the operating system “LiGNUx.”
> 
> His presentation on the “Say LiGNUx” campaign is served in PNG format
> at http://imgur.com/a/beY7E so you can see the insanity for yourself.
> 
> Yes, that's right. LiGNUx, pronounced like “pig cooks,” would be the
> name of choice for our work in the last two decades. Stallman suggests
> that we trash our existing name recognition and all common sense to
> adopt his academic linguistic exercise in masturbatory politics that
> represents the kernel's license and some poorly-built utilities that
> no one uses anymore.
> 
> Mr. Stallman even suggests that users who refuse to say LiGNUx should
> instead install GNU/HURD so as to remove any ambiguity about licenses
> and nomenclature. What the hell?!
> 
> When is the last time someone named their operating system after the
> license the kernel is released under? Such an esoteric naming method
> is madness. Should Apple call OS X “Apple/XNU?” Or how about the
> Berkeley operating systems? Should they call their products “FreeBSD”
> or “OpenBSD?” Should Microsoft call their operating system “Microsoft
> Windows?” The suggestion is patently absurd.
> 
> We should not give in to the wailing demands of this zealotry. Mr.
> Stallman clearly needs a break from promoting an increasingly
> irrelevant software platform. Perhaps that means banning him from
> LKML, or asking Linus to suggest some vacation therapy for poor Mr.
> Stallman and his zealotry, or having the Linux Foundation issue a
> press release distancing themselves from RMS, GNU, and the Free
> Software Foundation.
> 
> Whatever the next course of action is, we should all ignore Mr.
> Stallman and continue to call Linux as Linux.
> 
> I am interested to hear your thoughts on the topic, fellow Linux kernel 
hackers.
> 
> Merry Christmas.
> 
> Liam Oskar Lindholm,
> Linux Kernel Hacker

As much a I respect and acknowledge RMS for starting up GNU (even more after 
the Snowden leaks), I don't see any reason to put a g in Linux.

First of all: Don't change your name unless you're exceptionally good at PR.

Secondly: Linux -- the kernel -- is not part of GNU (a lot of the standard 
userspace utilities are though).

Surely GNU's not Linux. I remember it being a recursive acronym for "GNU's Not 
Unix!" (and there is a lot of things GNU isn't).

How about renaming GNU to LNG as in "Linux' Not GNU!"?. Or even *NG, since 
really not that much GPL'ed software is GNU.

(Not to start a flame war, but apropos I'd hate saying "My computer 
Hurds...".)

Oh, well... Merry Christmas.  *<:-)

-Martin

-- 
I bet Earth makes fun of other planets for having no life