[GNUz] GNU/Linux ...

[InfoHelp]

Thanks for getting us started moving over here Tim,

On Sat, 2004-07-03 at 15:46, Timothy Musson wrote:
> Jim Cheetham, 2004-07-02 21:58:00:
> > Well, I don't agree with the "GNU/Linux" position, even though I use
> > Debian
> 
> My take on the naming thing is that, if it hadn't been for the name
> "Debian GNU/Linux", I might not have "noticed" the GNU Project so soon,
> or realised that they were important. It would've taken me longer to
> understand that Free doesn't mean gratis. (That's why RMS pushes the
> GNU/* convention, and - for me at least - it did make a difference.)

I had formulated an observation to offer Jim back, and here's the best 
place I can find for it, away from archive.

Is the desire for a pure "GNU" formation practical here & now? Or ever?
While there are occasional BSD references on CLUG, non-"Linux" usage is
not critical mass. Reaching further afield, it may be, or the same. How
then will the objective of purity assist?

You seem to be reading the formulation "GNU/Linux" as a tainted GNU, or
a conditioned "Linux", where it's better read as an alliance. Or as a
switch - it offers dual choice, of GNU or Linux, on the same menu, or of
the combination of two related souls. Mates.

> > even though RMS dismisses them as "non-free"
> > [...]

Either too extreme, or in fact reformable.

> > I do think that a "pure GPL" distribution would be more practical, and
> > more in agreement with the spirit of free-libre software.

As an objective, worth aspiring to. As a starting point, impossible?

> I agree. My impression of the Debian situation is that RMS feels he
> can't _recommend_ a distribution that "encourages" people do something
> he considers unethical (i.e. install non-Free software), since to do so
> would make him a hypocrite.

So he needs us (GLU) to do it for him! Who else can muster an effect?

Thanks for the readings - off for a looksee..
> 
> Recent zest:
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20040226003735733
> 
> Older zest, but well worth a read if you haven't read it already:
> http://moglen.law.columbia.edu/publications/anarchism.html
> 
> ("Part 1" of the older zest is mostly just a bit of fun, and not vital
> to what follows. I mention that coz I found "Part 1" hard going, and the
> rest pretty jolly neat.)
> 
> Tim

Rik
-- 
GNU/Linux user ~ FedoraCore2 i686, kernel 2.6.5-1.358, GNOME 2.6 desktop
Evolution 1.4.6 email, Mozilla 1.6 browser, OpenOffice.org 1.1.1 suite ~