> > I don't wish to get into a shouting match, but I don't think I > completely agree with some of the things you say here. >
OK. Well, just toddle on over to the advocacy list where this can more appropriately be hashed out. ////jerry > On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 11:39, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > You are comparing apples and oranges. Linux is a kernel, not an > > operating system. "Distributions" is a specially ill-choosen word in > > the Linux world. > > I don't see why. I think "distribution" is a perfectly fine term for > what it describes. My comments below explain why. > > > There are several operating systems, Debian, RedHat, > > Mandrake, which only have in common to use the Linux kernel. > > This is incorrect. All relevant Linux distributions are not only based > on the same kernel, but almost almost all of the same userland software > as well. (Specifically, GNU software, much of which is a core part of > FreeBSD as well.) The main areas where they differ are the configuration _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
