>
> 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
> 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
>
> > 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
>
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
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
> 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
>
> > >
> >
> > 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
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
> >
>
> 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
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
>
>
> > 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."
>
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
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
> 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
> 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
"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
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
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
-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'
"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
> >
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
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
22 matches
Mail list logo