On 02/11/14 13:14, Frank McCormick wrote: > On 11/01/2014 10:00 PM, Scott Ferguson wrote: >> On 02/11/14 12:19, Frank McCormick wrote: >>> On 11/01/2014 08:58 PM, Scott Ferguson wrote: >>>> For the purpose of education not to fan silly semantic pedantics. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 02/11/14 05:24, Miles Fidelman wrote: <snipped> >>>>>> >>>>>> Second, we're not talking about vaguely "unixy" - we're talking >>>>>> about a well developed philosophy of designing things that >>>>>> dates back to Ken Thompson, et. al (c.f., "The UNIX Programming >>>>>> Environment,"or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy). >>>> I keep wondering if that's a cause of confusion. >>>> >>>> Why does the Linux kernel, GNU, and the rest of userland*have* to >>>> be done "the UNIX" way?? >>>> >>>> I keep hearing this assertion, but neither Linus Torvalds, or >>>> RMS/seem/ to support it's requirement. Could you expand on why this >>>> is a requirement from the people that produce's point of view?? >>> >>> In this interview he makes it clear he does not think the entire >>> Linux system has to be done "the UNIX way". >> >> *Which does not answer my question.* >> >> >> I'm well aware that neither RMS or Linus do not advocate that "Linux, >> kerenel and userland" are UNIX, not have to be "the UNIX way". >> >> I'm asking why people keep insisting that systemd is bad >> *because it's not the UNIX way*. >> >> It sounds like a strawman - but I'm giving the benefit of the doubt and >> asking for clarification. >> I'm uncertain of your intention/comprehension of the question Frank - >> but your response is not an answer to my question. > > I know exactly what your are saying. > At any rate your disagreement is with Miles....
Disagreement? Not the word I'd use. Confused? Puzzled? Certainly "seeking clarification". > I simply posted the > link to make it clear Linus does NOT feel the UNIX way is a requirement > for Linux software, because of your use of the word "seem". Thanks Frank. Yes - the word "seem" was deliberate. (and I've never been able to find any evidence of Debian, RMS, or Linux declaring "Linux kernel/userland" 'needing' to be UNIX philosophy compliant. However proving a negative can be difficult, and I'm trying to be open-minded (without going to the extreme of allowing my brains to fallout). Kind regards -- "Turns out you can't back a winner in the Gish Gallop" ~ disappointed punter -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54559fc0.3060...@gmail.com
