Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-08 Thread John Summerfield
> > Info in the pre-HTML era allowed to have hypertext documentation, After OS/2, html is second-rate at best. info was a truly bad shock. > something man pages didn't alloww and the real reader of info pages is > not the info program. It is Emacs. The info program was a kludge to > allow vi

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-08 Thread John Summerfield
> Some of the open source people ARE the ones responsible for these > other OSes. Many times you have people doing the open source development > on their own time to explore ideas that they cannot while doing > development work at their day job. I even saw someone at microsoft.com recently. I f

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-07 Thread JF Martinez
> > > I still remember my disappointment in 1995 when I got an Aix station > > and noticed that in many areas its software was inferior to Linux's. > > It's true that many of the other Unixes were and still are inferior to > Linux, but having used them in production situations they were often >

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-07 Thread stano
Hello, please, take the discussion off this list. Anyone who follows the open source development has seen it several times and there is really no argument that wasn't already said. You are only making the troll who posted it here happy... Regards -- Stano -- T

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-07 Thread J. Scott Kasten
Some of the open source people ARE the ones responsible for these other OSes. Many times you have people doing the open source development on their own time to explore ideas that they cannot while doing development work at their day job. On Tue, Dec 07, 1999 at 10:16:25AM -0500, Matt Fahrner wro

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-07 Thread Matt Fahrner
> I still remember my disappointment in 1995 when I got an Aix station > and noticed that in many areas its software was inferior to Linux's. It's true that many of the other Unixes were and still are inferior to Linux, but having used them in production situations they were often more than suffi

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-06 Thread JF Martinez
> > > > > > > > Linux would have not been possible without the Gnu utilities and the > > compiler used to built has ever been gcc. What would have been of > > Linux if Gcc didn't exist? What of its performance if Gcc had been > > mediocre? The only other 32 bits compiler I am aware of who wa

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-06 Thread Dave Ihnat
H. Peter Anvin wrote: I really don't want to even get _near_ the Stallman/Linux debate. It's all silly. (I've been diddling Unix source code since 1980; I'm just glad to see the dynamic _fun_ of playing with it back, and not encumbered by non- disclosures and contracts this time.) But I had to

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-06 Thread John Summerfield
> > > > Linux would have not been possible without the Gnu utilities and the > compiler used to built has ever been gcc. What would have been of > Linux if Gcc didn't exist? What of its performance if Gcc had been > mediocre? The only other 32 bits compiler I am aware of who was > freely avai

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-06 Thread H. Peter Anvin
JF Martinez wrote: > > Linux would have not been possible without the Gnu utilities and the > compiler used to built has ever been gcc. What would have been of > Linux if Gcc didn't exist? What of its performance if Gcc had been > mediocre? The only other 32 bits compiler I am aware of who was

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-06 Thread JF Martinez
> > > > cooperate, we may be able to do so. However, one problem may be hard > > to solve: the LSB is mainly dealing with issues at the operating > > system level--and is therefore in effect calling the GNU operating > > system "Linux". > > Oh. I thought the GNU operating system was "HURD." >

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-06 Thread Alain Magloire
Bonjour M. Matt Fahrner Nicely said. I remember it seems now like "eons" when I was running kernel 0.xx, Ha ! the good old days 8-) During those "dark ages", I would go in computer stores and ask for a linux distribution and sometimes force them to make a special order to bring that "Linux" in

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-06 Thread Matt Fahrner
Certainly Richard Stallman and the rest of the contributors of the GNU Project deserve credit for their enormous work, but I imagine at this point it's probably a little too late in the game for a change of this magnitude. Regardless, most of us who've been in this business any time have been well

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-05 Thread John Summerfield
> cooperate, we may be able to do so. However, one problem may be hard > to solve: the LSB is mainly dealing with issues at the operating > system level--and is therefore in effect calling the GNU operating > system "Linux". Oh. I thought the GNU operating system was "HURD." gnu software runs

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-05 Thread Alan Cox
> mean to say that there is an enormous amount of difficult to replace, > *highly portable* code in Linux that comes from GNU. I can see how the > GNU contributors may feel cheated when all the credit goes elsewhere > in the eyes of the public. Not this again. > At the end, tribalism aside, bot

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-05 Thread Diego Pons
"H. Peter Anvin" wrote: > > Damien Miller wrote: > > > > On Sun, 5 Dec 1999, Diego Pons wrote: > > > > > > Of course, most Linux people object just as vehemently to the GNU > > > > people's presumptiveness on this account. I happen to agree with these > > > > Linux people. > > > > > > Would you

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-05 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Damien Miller wrote: > > On Sun, 5 Dec 1999, Diego Pons wrote: > > > > Of course, most Linux people object just as vehemently to the GNU > > > people's presumptiveness on this account. I happen to agree with these > > > Linux people. > > > > Would you care to elaborate? I've read GNU's argument

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-04 Thread Havoc Pennington
Hi, Please take this flamewar off of gnome-list. I don't see why Richard's mail was forwarded here, but even if it was relevant to something the thread should NOT continue in off-topic directions, which is just about every direction I can think of. So if anyone gets the urge to reply, go up the

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-04 Thread Damien Miller
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 5 Dec 1999, Diego Pons wrote: > > Of course, most Linux people object just as vehemently to the GNU > > people's presumptiveness on this account. I happen to agree with these > > Linux people. > > Would you care to elaborate? I've read GNU'

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-04 Thread Diego Pons
"H. Peter Anvin" wrote: > > Svante Signell wrote: > [Forwarded from RMS] > > > > Many of you are aware that the GNU Project objects to this. If you've > > heard about this from other people, you may have heard an inaccurate > > rendition of the reasons why; people who disagree and those who > >

Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-04 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Svante Signell wrote: [Forwarded from RMS] > > Many of you are aware that the GNU Project objects to this. If you've > heard about this from other people, you may have heard an inaccurate > rendition of the reasons why; people who disagree and those who > support us often oversimplify them. See

forwarded message from Richard Stallman

1999-12-04 Thread Svante Signell
Forwarding this mail on request. [The lists [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] would not let me post to them. If you can, would you please forward this reply to those lists?] If people in the LSB are now interested in working with the GNU Project, that's a good thing. Starting with thi