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

[Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com>]

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.