FS#7576 - name should change to arch gnu/linux

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by farid (osc) - Friday, 06 July 2007, 23:21 GMT
Last edited by Jan de Groot (JGC) - Wednesday, 25 July 2007, 11:24 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category System
Status Closed
Assigned To Judd Vinet (judd)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Low
Reported Version 2007.05 Duke
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

Description: tomk suggested to post the following, from a forum discussion.
friends
i really believe the distribution should use gnu in the name. this is an important matter.
part of the reason i am thinking of switching from slackware is this reason. (there are others of course)
also since the license is GPL that is more of a reason to add gnu.
it is important that the name carries in it the freedom that the fsf and gnu represent.
cheers.

Additional info:
* package version(s)
* config and/or log files etc.


Steps to reproduce:
This task depends upon

Closed by  Jan de Groot (JGC)
Wednesday, 25 July 2007, 11:24 GMT
Reason for closing:  Won't implement
Comment by Jan de Groot (JGC) - Saturday, 07 July 2007, 08:39 GMT
Why would we have to name it GNU linux? We use many BSD utils, our package manager is based on two BSD libraries and SuSE, Mandriva and Redhat aren't named GNU linux either. Actually, the only distribution that I know of that uses "GNU linux" is Debian.
Also, introducing "GNU linux" would make me explain what GNU is to people who ask me what I'm working on...
Comment by Andreas Radke (AndyRTR) - Saturday, 07 July 2007, 09:35 GMT
i'm also against it. we use tools from various opensource places: gnu land, *bsd stuff but also public domain and solaris are options. as we are also less restrictive than debian GNU/linux when it comes to closed source software i see no reason why we should add GNU to our name.
Comment by Dan McGee (toofishes) - Wednesday, 11 July 2007, 12:58 GMT
-1
Comment by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka) - Sunday, 15 July 2007, 10:59 GMT
I don't agree with FSF's explanation of GNU/Linux.
The term "GNU operating system" is very fuzzy.
IMO the kernel is the most important part that constitutes Unix-like OS. Why not call some distro GNU/Linux/KDE then? ;-P
There are Linux distros that do not even contain any GNU software (like embedded systems with uclibc/busybox, for example).
Ok, no more comments, just -1 from me.

Loading...