RE: Nvidia and its choice to read the GPL "differently"

[Rob Wilkens <robw@optonline.net>]

I think Gnu in the name is a great idea (debian uses it already, I
think).  It helps point out that Linus Torvalds didn't create this great
thing that most people call linux (his namesake).  Linus Torvalds didn't
create and wants nothing to do with the windowing system or user
components, which most end users would consider what their experience
with linux is (whether they use guis or the command line) -- especially
non-tech-heads.  Linus torvalds did not create the compilers or
libraries the developers use.  Linus torvalds simply created a bare
bones kernel -- a piece of the operating system which literally does
almost nothing.  Thanks to the GPL others helped him grow the kernel,
and he's been a good leader in that he's let others give him lot of free
code changes to include in his namesake system.

He just got lucky on his timing... Anyone studying operating systems at
the time (and heck, I remember owning a book "Creating your own 32-bit
operating system" by SAMS publishing and being inspired, and I also
owned "Disecting DOS" which was a nice analysis of a DOS-like operating
system at the code-level book w/disk).  If I had been familiar with UNIX
at the time I had those books, I might've written ROBIX before LINUX
came around, and released it on an even lesser than less GPL whereby
anyone who wanted could do whatever they wanted with it however they
wanted, commercially or not, open-sourcely-or-not.

-Rob

On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 10:29, Larry Sendlosky wrote:
> Richard, 
> 
> We all know that "Linux" would not be where it is today without
> the GNU software. I don't recall seeing one post in this
> looonnngg thread that tries to say otherwise. Myself, and many others,
> are very grateful for your and the FSF's work. PLEASE, stop hitting us
> over the head with GNU/Linux. 
> 
> I'm sure there are many other "things" that have gotten broad public
> attention and the real people or organizations behind it have not gotten
> the credit they deserve either by what the "thing" is called or by
> the press, etc. Only the people truly involved with the "thing"
> know who is responsible. I think the same applies here. 
> 
> And, why is it only *you* beating us over the head with GNU/Linux?
> Where's the rest for the GNU (non-linux specific) contributors?
> Why aren't they bitching/whining too?
> 
> Like I said before, we aren't the people you have to educate/convince.
> If it really means that much to you (and it seems to me that it does),
> then you should be taking out magazine ads and buying time on TV
> to reach the uneducated masses.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry McVoy [mailto:lm@bitmover.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 6:39 PM
> To: Richard Stallman
> Cc: Vlad@Vlad.geekizoid.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: Nvidia and its choice to read the GPL "differently"
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 06:14:20PM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote:
> > GNU, the system we were developing, was most of the early GNU/Linux
> > system in 1992.  GNU in 1992 included non-GNU packages such as X11,
> > and TeX.
> 
> Wow.  That might be one for the quotes file:
> 
>     "GNU ... was of the early GNU/Linux system.  GNU ... included non-GNU"
> 
> Well, that certainly explains a lot.  If you define GNU as "anything
> which might be found on a Linux distro including non-GNU packages",
> your position starts to make a certain twisted sense.  Only one problem
> with that: if it wasn't GNU, it wasn't GNU, which means, Richard, you
> are crackin' smoke and may need a vacation.  19 years of hard effort is 
> a long time, have you considered retirement?  You've certainly earned it.
> 
> Oh, by the way, have you updated the GNU kernel pages to reflect the new
> proper name: Linux/Hurd?  I'd really appreciate it if you could get to that.