On 10/10/17 04:45, Peter Lebbing wrote: > That to me means I would support leaving it as is. I don't feel strongly > on writing it one way or another, but I do dislike the pressure some > people exert on others pushing their view. If however you are > consistently writing "Microsoft Windows®" everywhere in the FAQ, I'd > find it natural to write "GNU/Linux" as well.
This is a fallacy. Windows *is* Microsoft Windows, the only thing called “Windows” (as a proper noun) in informatics. Not so with “GNU/Linux”. GNU/Linux is not Linux. Linux is a kernel. GNU/Linux is the combination of this kernel with software from the GNU project. The word “operating system” is too vague to have a reasonable discussion of exactly what set of programs are part of an operating system. In any case, it is clear that Linux is a kernel, not an operating system[1]. Also, the argument that GNU PG can be used on Linux without GNU is invalid, for it can also be used without Linux. Several BSD variants include GNU PG. [1] I challenge anybody who replies with “operating system”=“kernel” to explain how this viewpoint is compatible with the practice of calling FreeBSD, Windows, OS X (as a whole) and so on an “operating system” and not a “kernel”. -- Do not eat animals; respect them as you respect people. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=how+to+(become+OR+eat)+vegan
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
