diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/gnu-linux-faq.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/gnu-linux-faq.html | 339 |
1 files changed, 194 insertions, 145 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/gnu-linux-faq.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/gnu-linux-faq.html index 5d36592..5807955 100644 --- a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/gnu-linux-faq.html +++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/gnu-linux-faq.html @@ -1,30 +1,30 @@ -<!--#include virtual="/server/html5-header.html" --> +<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> <!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 --> +<!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html --> +<!--#set var="TAGS" value="gnulinux" --> +<!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" --> <title>GNU/Linux FAQ - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title> <!--#include virtual="/gnu/po/gnu-linux-faq.translist" --> <!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> -<h2 class="c">GNU/Linux FAQ</h2> +<!--#include virtual="/gnu/gnu-breadcrumb.html" --> +<!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE--> +<!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" --> +<div class="article reduced-width"> +<h2>GNU/Linux FAQ</h2> -<address class="byline c">by Richard Stallman</address> +<address class="byline">by Richard Stallman</address> -<div class="reduced-width"> -<hr class="no-display" /> -<div class="announcement"> -<p>To learn more about this issue, you can also read -our page on <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">Linux and the GNU Project</a>, our - page on <a href="/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html">Why GNU/Linux?</a> -and our page on <a href="/gnu/gnu-users-never-heard-of-gnu.html">GNU -Users Who Have Never Heard of GNU</a>.</p> -</div> -<hr class="thin" /> - -<div class="article"> +<div class="introduction"> <p> When people see that we use and recommend the name GNU/Linux for a -system that many others call just “Linux”, they ask many questions. +system that many others call just “Linux,” they ask many questions. Here are common questions, and our answers.</p> +</div> +<div class="toc"> +<hr class="no-display" /> +<h3 class="no-display">Table of Contents</h3> <ul> <li><a href="#why">Why do you call the system we use GNU/Linux and not Linux?</a></li> @@ -117,8 +117,8 @@ Here are common questions, and our answers.</p> <li><a href="#trademarkfee">I would have to pay a fee if I use “Linux” in the name of a product, and - that would also apply if I say “GNU/Linux”. Is it - wrong if I use “GNU” without “Linux”, to + that would also apply if I say “GNU/Linux.” Is it + wrong if I use “GNU” without “Linux,” to save the fee?</a></li> <li><a href="#many">Many other projects contributed to the @@ -146,6 +146,9 @@ Here are common questions, and our answers.</p> “GNU/Linux” instead of “GNU Linux”?</a></li> +<li><a href="#linuxlibre">Does GNU have its own version of Linux, + the kernel?</a></li> + <li><a href="#pronounce">How is the name “GNU/Linux” pronounced?</a></li> @@ -156,7 +159,7 @@ pronounced?</a></li> rather than “Linux/GNU”?</a></li> <li><a href="#distronames0">My distro's developers call it - “Foobar Linux”, but that doesn't say anything about + “Foobar Linux,” but that doesn't say anything about what the system consists of. Why shouldn't they call it whatever they like?</a></li> @@ -268,14 +271,14 @@ is needed for the system to be GNU/Linux?</a></li> <li><a href="#deserve">Since you failed to put something in the GNU GPL to require people to call the system - “GNU”, you deserve what happened; why are you + “GNU,” you deserve what happened; why are you complaining now?</a></li> <li><a href="#contradict">Wouldn't you be better off not contradicting what so many people believe?</a></li> <li><a href="#somanyright">Since many people call it - “Linux”, doesn't that make it right?</a></li> + “Linux,” doesn't that make it right?</a></li> <li><a href="#knownname">Isn't it better to call the system by the name most users already know?</a></li> @@ -285,7 +288,16 @@ is needed for the system to be GNU/Linux?</a></li> get more of their support by a different road?</a></li> </ul> -<hr class="thin" /> +</div> + +<div class="announcement comment" role="complementary"> +<p>To learn more about this issue, you can also read +our page on <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">Linux and the GNU System</a>, our + page on <a href="/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html">Why GNU/Linux?</a> +and our page on <a href="/gnu/gnu-users-never-heard-of-gnu.html">GNU +Users Who Have Never Heard of GNU</a>.</p> +<hr class="no-display" /> +</div> <dl> @@ -326,10 +338,13 @@ practical importance of these ideals</a>.</p> <dt id="what">What is the real relationship between GNU and Linux? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#what">#what</a>)</span></dt> -<dd>The GNU operating system and the Linux kernel are separate +<dd> +<p> +The GNU operating system and the Linux kernel are separate software projects that do complementary jobs. Typically they are packaged in a <a href="/distros/distros.html">GNU/Linux distribution</a>, and used -together.</dd> +together.</p> +</dd> <dt id="howerror">How did it come about that most people call the system “Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#howerror">#howerror</a>)</span></dt> @@ -352,7 +367,7 @@ picture of the system's origin, because people tend to suppose that the system's history was such as to fit that name. For instance, they often believe its development was started by Linus Torvalds in 1991. This false picture tends to reinforce the idea -that the system should be called “Linux”.</p> +that the system should be called “Linux.”</p> <p> Many of the questions in this file represent people's attempts to justify the name they are accustomed to using.</p> @@ -363,14 +378,14 @@ justify the name they are accustomed to using.</p> <dd> Not always—only when you're talking about the whole system. When you're referring specifically to the kernel, you should call it -“Linux”, the name its developer chose. +“Linux,” the name its developer chose. <p> -When people call the whole system “Linux”, as a consequence +When people call the whole system “Linux,” as a consequence they call the whole system by the same name as the kernel. This causes many kinds of confusion, because only experts can tell whether a statement is about the kernel or the whole system. -By calling the whole system “GNU/Linux”, and calling the kernel -“Linux”, you avoid the ambiguity.</p> +By calling the whole system “GNU/Linux,” and calling the kernel +“Linux,” you avoid the ambiguity.</p> </dd> <dt id="linuxalone">Would Linux have @@ -400,7 +415,7 @@ framework, a complete free operating system: GNU/Linux.</p> community if you did not divide people with this request? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#divide">#divide</a>)</span></dt> <dd> -When we ask people to say “GNU/Linux”, we are not dividing people. We +When we ask people to say “GNU/Linux,” we are not dividing people. We are asking them to give the GNU Project credit for the GNU operating system. This does not criticize anyone or push anyone away. <p> @@ -428,7 +443,7 @@ Source misses the point of Free Software</a>.</p> The disagreement over values partially aligns with the amount of attention people pay to the GNU Project's role in our community. People who value freedom are more likely to call the system -“GNU/Linux”, and people who learn that the system is “GNU/Linux” are +“GNU/Linux,” and people who learn that the system is “GNU/Linux” are more likely to pay attention to our philosophical arguments for freedom and community (which is why the choice of name for the system makes a real difference for society). However, the disagreement would @@ -442,11 +457,12 @@ are defeated entirely (let's hope not).</p> support an individual's free speech rights to call the system by any name that individual chooses? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#freespeech">#freespeech</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> Yes, indeed, we believe you have a free speech right to call the operating system by any name you wish. We ask that people call it GNU/Linux as a matter of doing justice to the GNU project, to promote the values of freedom that GNU stands for, and to inform others that -those values of freedom brought the system into existence. +those values of freedom brought the system into existence.</p> </dd> <dt id="everyoneknows">Since everyone knows the role @@ -455,7 +471,7 @@ those values of freedom brought the system into existence. <dd>Experience shows that the system's users, and the computer-using public in general, often know nothing about the GNU system. Most -articles about the system do not mention the name “GNU”, or the ideals +articles about the system do not mention the name “GNU,” or the ideals that GNU stands for. <a href="/gnu/gnu-users-never-heard-of-gnu.html">GNU Users Who Have Never Heard of GNU</a> explains further. @@ -463,7 +479,7 @@ Heard of GNU</a> explains further. The people who say this are probably geeks thinking of the geeks they know. Geeks often do know about GNU, but many have a completely wrong idea of what GNU is. For instance, many think it is a collection -of <a href="#tools">“tools”</a>, or a project to develop tools.</p> +of “<a href="#tools">tools</a>,” or a project to develop tools.</p> <p> The wording of this question, which is typical, illustrates another common misconception. To speak of “GNU's role” in developing @@ -476,11 +492,12 @@ this or some other activity, but not that of GNU.</p> why does it matter what name I use? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#everyoneknows2">#everyoneknows2</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> If your words don't reflect your knowledge, you don't teach others. Most people who have heard of the GNU/Linux system think it is -“Linux”, that it was started by Linus Torvalds, and that -it was intended to be “open source”. If you don't tell -them, who will? +“Linux,” that it was started by Linus Torvalds, and that +it was intended to be “open source.” If you don't tell +them, who will?</p> </dd> <dt id="windows">Isn't shortening “GNU/Linux” @@ -508,10 +525,10 @@ GNU is an operating system.</p> People who think that Linux is an entire operating system, if they hear about GNU at all, often get a wrong idea of what GNU is. They may think that GNU is the name of a collection of programs—often they -say “programming tools”, since some of our programming tools became +say “programming tools,” since some of our programming tools became popular on their own. The idea that “GNU” is the name of an operating system is hard to fit into a conceptual framework in which that -operating system is labeled “Linux”. +operating system is labeled “Linux.” <p> The GNU Project was named after the GNU operating system—it's the project to develop the GNU system. (See <a @@ -540,7 +557,7 @@ running. The kernel also takes care of starting and stopping other programs.</p> <p> To confuse matters, some people use the term “operating system” to -mean “kernel”. Both uses of the term go back many years. The +mean “kernel.” Both uses of the term go back many years. The use of “operating system” to mean “kernel” is found in a number of textbooks on system design, going back to the 80s. At the same time, in the 80s, the “Unix operating system” was understood to include all @@ -551,12 +568,12 @@ use the term “operating system” in the same way.</p> Most of the time when people speak of the “Linux operating system” they are using “operating system” in the same sense we use: they mean the whole collection of programs. If that's what you are referring -to, please call it “GNU/Linux”. If you mean just the kernel, then +to, please call it “GNU/Linux.” If you mean just the kernel, then “Linux” is the right name for it, but please say “kernel” also to avoid ambiguity about which body of software you mean.</p> <p> If you prefer to use some other term such as “system distribution” for -the entire collection of programs, instead of “operating system”, +the entire collection of programs, instead of “operating system,” that's fine. Then you would talk about GNU/Linux system distributions.</p> </dd> @@ -587,16 +604,18 @@ essential module, that would be like the GNU system in 1992. <dt id="brain">Isn't the kernel the brain of the system? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#brain">#brain</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> A computer system is not much like a human body, and no part of it plays a role comparable to that of -the brain in a human. +the brain in a human.</p> </dd> <dt id="kernelmost">Isn't writing the kernel most of the work in an operating system? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#kernelmost">#kernelmost</a>)</span></dt> <dd> -No, many components take a lot of work. +<p> +No, many components take a lot of work.</p> </dd> <dt id="nokernel">An operating system requires a kernel. @@ -606,8 +625,8 @@ No, many components take a lot of work. <dd> The people who argue that way for calling the system “Linux” are using a double standard. An operating system -requires compilers, editors, window systems, libraries, and much more -— hundreds of programs, even to match what BSD systems included +requires compilers, editors, window systems, libraries, and much +more—hundreds of programs, even to match what BSD systems included in 1983. Since Torvalds didn't develop any of those, how can the system be “Linux”? @@ -628,7 +647,7 @@ The name “GNU/Linux” gives credit to each.</p> <dd> Many <a href="/distros/distros.html"> packaged and installable versions of GNU</a> are available. None of them is called simply -“GNU”, but GNU is what they basically are. +“GNU,” but GNU is what they basically are. <p> We expected to release the GNU system packaged for installation, but @@ -655,7 +674,7 @@ This includes repackaging a substantial part of the GNU system.</p> <p> We never took the last step of packaging GNU under the name -“GNU”, but that doesn't alter what kind of thing GNU is. +“GNU,” but that doesn't alter what kind of thing GNU is. GNU is an operating system.</p> </dd> @@ -665,11 +684,11 @@ GNU is an operating system.</p> <dd> That practice seems to be very rare—we can't find any examples other -than the misuse of the name “Linux”. Normally an operating system is +than the misuse of the name “Linux.” Normally an operating system is developed as a single unified project, and the developers choose a name for the system as a whole. The kernel usually does not have a name of its own—instead, people say “the kernel of such-and-such” or -“the such-and-such kernel”. +“the such-and-such kernel.” <p> Because those two constructions are used synonymously, the expression “the Linux kernel” can easily be misunderstood as meaning “the kernel @@ -682,22 +701,23 @@ avoid the possibility of this misunderstanding by saying or writing feel of Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#feel">#feel</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> There is no such thing as the “feel of Linux” because Linux has no user interfaces. Like any modern kernel, Linux is a base for running programs; user interfaces belong elsewhere in the system. Human interaction with GNU/Linux always goes through other programs, -and the “feel” comes from them. +and the “feel” comes from them.</p> </dd> <dt id="long">The problem with “GNU/Linux” is that it is too long. How about recommending a shorter name? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#long">#long</a>)</span></dt> <dd> -For a while we tried the name “LiGNUx”, which combines the words “GNU” -and “Linux”. The reaction was very bad. People accept “GNU/Linux” +For a while we tried the name “LiGNUx,” which combines the words “GNU” +and “Linux.” The reaction was very bad. People accept “GNU/Linux” much better. <p> -The shortest legitimate name for this system is “GNU”, but +The shortest legitimate name for this system is “GNU,” but we call it “GNU/Linux” <a href="#justgnu"> for the reasons given below</a>.</p> </dd> @@ -722,7 +742,7 @@ not read it.</p> <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#long2">#long2</a>)</span></dt> <dd> -<p>It only takes a second to say or type “GNU/”. If you +<p>It only takes a second to say or type “GNU/.” If you appreciate the system that we developed, can't you take one second to recognize our work?</p> </dd> @@ -773,25 +793,25 @@ disagree with his political views, but we deal with that disagreement honorably and openly, rather than by trying to cut him out of the credit for his contribution to the system.</li> <li> -Since many people know of the system as “Linux”, if we say “GNU” they +Since many people know of the system as “Linux,” if we say “GNU” they may simply not recognize we're talking about the same system. If we -say “GNU/Linux”, they can make a connection to what they have heard +say “GNU/Linux,” they can make a connection to what they have heard about.</li> -</ul><p></p> +</ul> </dd> <dt id="trademarkfee">I would have to pay a fee if I use “Linux” in the name of a product, and that - would also apply if I say “GNU/Linux”. Is it wrong if I use “GNU” - without “Linux”, to save the fee? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#trademarkfee">#trademarkfee</a>)</span></dt> + would also apply if I say “GNU/Linux.” Is it wrong if I use “GNU” + without “Linux,” to save the fee? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#trademarkfee">#trademarkfee</a>)</span></dt> <dd> There's nothing wrong in calling the system “GNU”; basically, that's what it is. It is nice to give Linus Torvalds a share of the credit as well, but you have no obligation to pay for the privilege of doing so. <p> -So if you want to refer to the system simply as “GNU”, to avoid paying -the fee for calling it “Linux”, we won't criticize you.</p> +So if you want to refer to the system simply as “GNU,” to avoid paying +the fee for calling it “Linux,” we won't criticize you.</p> </dd> <dt id="many">Many other projects contributed to @@ -821,7 +841,7 @@ we won't argue against it.</p> <p> Different threshold levels would lead to different choices of name for the system. But one name that cannot result from concerns of fairness -and giving credit, not for any possible threshold level, is “Linux”. +and giving credit, not for any possible threshold level, is “Linux.” It can't be fair to give all the credit to one secondary contribution (Linux) while omitting the principal contribution (GNU).</p> </dd> @@ -831,11 +851,12 @@ It can't be fair to give all the credit to one secondary contribution GNU/systemd/Linux? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#others">#others</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> systemd is a fairly important component, but not as important as the kernel (Linux), nor as important as the basis of the system as a whole (GNU). However, if you want to emphasize the presence of systemd -by calling the system “GNU/systemd/Linux”, there is nothing -wrong with doing so. +by calling the system “GNU/systemd/Linux,” there is nothing +wrong with doing so.</p> </dd> <dt id="others">Many other projects contributed to @@ -859,7 +880,7 @@ framework on which the system was made.</p> In 2008, we found that GNU packages made up 15% of the “main” repository of the gNewSense GNU/Linux distribution. Linux made up 1.5%. So the same argument would apply even more -strongly to calling it “Linux”. +strongly to calling it “Linux.” <p> GNU is a small fraction of the system nowadays, and Linux is an @@ -896,7 +917,7 @@ instead of “GNU Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href=" <dd> Following the rules of English, in the construction “GNU Linux” the -word “GNU” modifies “Linux”. This can mean either “GNU's version of +word “GNU” modifies “Linux.” This can mean either “GNU's version of Linux” or “Linux, which is a GNU package.” Neither of those meanings fits the situation at hand. <p> @@ -907,22 +928,37 @@ Torvalds wrote Linux independently, as his own project. So the <p> We're not talking about a distinct GNU version of Linux, the kernel. The free GNU/Linux distros do have -a <a href="http://directory.fsf.org/project/linux">separate version of -Linux</a>, since the “standard” version contains non-free -firmware “blobs”. If this were part of the GNU Project, +a <a href="https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Linux-libre">separate version of +Linux</a>, since the “standard” version contains nonfree +firmware “blobs.” If this were part of the GNU Project, it could be considered “GNU Linux”; but we would not want to call it that, because it would be too confusing.</p> <p> We're talking about a version of GNU, the operating system, distinguished by having Linux as the kernel. A slash fits the situation because it means “combination.” (Think of -“Input/Output”.) This system is the combination of GNU -and Linux; hence, “GNU/Linux”.</p> +“Input/Output.”) It's the GNU system, with the kernel +Linux underneath; hence, “GNU/Linux.”</p> <p> -There are other ways to express “combination”. If you +There are other ways to express “combination.” If you think that a plus-sign is clearer, please use that. In French, a -hyphen is clear: “GNU-Linux”. In Spanish, we sometimes -say “GNU con Linux”.</p> +hyphen is clear: “GNU-Linux.” In Spanish, we sometimes +say “GNU con Linux.”</p> +</dd> + +<dt id="linuxlibre">Does GNU have its own version of Linux, the kernel? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#linuxlibre">#linuxlibre</a>)</span></dt> + +<dd> +Yes and no. The free GNU/Linux distros use slightly modified versions +of Linux, modified to remove the nonfree firmware “blobs” +contained in the “standard” release of Linux. Some of +them use <a href="https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Linux-libre">GNU +Linux-Libre</a>, which is the GNU Project's freed version of Linux. +But this is not a fork; rather, it is a version of Linux—we +take the source of each standard Linux release and de-blob it. +<p> +Other free distros make their own arrangements to remove the blobs +from Linux.</p> </dd> <dt id="pronounce">How is the name “GNU/Linux” @@ -941,7 +977,7 @@ rather than “GNU/Emacs”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href= <dd> <p> Following the rules of English, in the construction “GNU -Emacs” the word “GNU” modifies “Emacs”. +Emacs” the word “GNU” modifies “Emacs.” That is the right way to describe a program called Emacs which is a GNU package.</p> <p> @@ -962,13 +998,13 @@ prior to Linux, we actually started the whole activity.</p> In addition, “GNU/Linux” fits the fact that Linux is the lowest level of the system and GNU fills technically higher levels.</p> <p> -However, if you prefer to call the system “Linux/GNU”, that is a lot +However, if you prefer to call the system “Linux/GNU,” that is a lot better than what people usually do, which is to omit GNU entirely and make it seem that the whole system is Linux.</p> </dd> <dt id="distronames0">My distro's developers call it - “Foobar Linux”, but that doesn't say anything about + “Foobar Linux,” but that doesn't say anything about what the system consists of. Why shouldn't they call it whatever they like? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#distronames0">#distronames0</a>)</span></dt> <dd> @@ -997,9 +1033,9 @@ encourage it to do the same.</p> anything but “Foobar Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#distronames1">#distronames1</a>)</span></dt> <dd><p>When they spread misinformation by changing “GNU” -to “Linux”, and call their version of it “Foobar -Linux”, it's proper for you to correct the misinformation by -calling it “Foobar GNU/Linux”.</p></dd> +to “Linux,” and call their version of it “Foobar +Linux,” it's proper for you to correct the misinformation by +calling it “Foobar GNU/Linux.”</p></dd> <dt id="companies">Wouldn't it be more effective to ask companies such as Mandrake, Red Hat and IBM to @@ -1020,7 +1056,7 @@ We can't make them do this right, but we're not the sort to give up just because the road isn't easy. You may not have as much influence at your disposal as IBM or Red Hat, but you can still help. Together we can change the situation to the point where companies will make -more profit calling it “GNU/Linux”.</p> +more profit calling it “GNU/Linux.”</p> </dd> <dt id="reserve">Wouldn't it be better to @@ -1028,13 +1064,13 @@ more profit calling it “GNU/Linux”.</p> free software? After all, that is the ideal of GNU. <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#reserve">#reserve</a>)</span></dt> <dd> -The widespread practice of adding non-free software to the GNU/Linux +The widespread practice of adding nonfree software to the GNU/Linux system is a major problem for our community. It teaches the users -that non-free software is ok, and that using it is part of the spirit -of “Linux”. Many “Linux” User Groups make it part of their mission to -help users use non-free add-ons, and may even invite salesmen to come +that nonfree software is ok, and that using it is part of the spirit +of “Linux.” Many “Linux” User Groups make it part of their mission to +help users use nonfree add-ons, and may even invite salesmen to come and make sales pitches for them. They adopt goals such as “helping -the users” of GNU/Linux (including helping them use non-free +the users” of GNU/Linux (including helping them use nonfree applications and drivers), or making the system more popular even at the cost of freedom. <p> @@ -1052,9 +1088,9 @@ exactly the opposite: to inform them that all these system versions <em>are</em> versions of GNU, that they all are based on a system that exists specifically for the sake of the users' freedom. With this understanding, they can start to recognize the distributions -that include non-free software as perverted, adulterated versions of +that include nonfree software as perverted, adulterated versions of GNU, instead of thinking they are proper and appropriate “versions of -Linux”.</p> +Linux.”</p> <p> It is very useful to start GNU/Linux User Groups, which call the system GNU/Linux and adopt the ideals of the GNU Project as a basis @@ -1081,7 +1117,7 @@ unless the new distribution had substantial practical advantages over other distributions, it would serve no purpose.</p> <p> Instead we help the developers of 100% free GNU/Linux distributions, -such as gNewSense and Ututo.</p> +such as Trisquel and Parabola.</p> </dd> <dt id="linuxgnu">Why not just say “Linux is @@ -1094,8 +1130,8 @@ in 1992. If we had realized, then, how long it would take to get the GNU Hurd to work, we might have done that. (Alas, that is hindsight.) <p> If we were to take an existing version of GNU/Linux and relabel it as -“GNU”, that would be somewhat like making a version of the GNU system -and labeling it “Linux”. That wasn't right, and we don't +“GNU,” that would be somewhat like making a version of the GNU system +and labeling it “Linux.” That wasn't right, and we don't want to act like that.</p> </dd> @@ -1114,7 +1150,7 @@ up for installation. <p> The people who had made the changes showed little interest in cooperating with us. One of them actually told us that he didn't care -about working with the GNU Project because he was a “Linux user”. +about working with the GNU Project because he was a “Linux user.” That came as a shock, because the people who ported GNU packages to other systems had generally wanted to work with us to get their changes installed. Yet these people, developing a system that was @@ -1122,7 +1158,7 @@ primarily based on GNU, were the first (and still practically the only) group that was unwilling to work with us.</p> <p> It was this experience that first showed us that people were calling a -version of the GNU system “Linux”, and that this confusion was +version of the GNU system “Linux,” and that this confusion was obstructing our work. Asking you to call the system “GNU/Linux” is our response to that problem, and to the other problems caused by the “Linux” misnomer.</p> @@ -1141,8 +1177,8 @@ distributors about this in 1994, and made a more public campaign in convention be applied to all programs that are GPL'ed? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#allgpled">#allgpled</a>)</span></dt> <dd> -We never refer to individual programs as “GNU/<i>name</i>”. When a program -is a GNU package, we may call it “GNU <i>name</i>”. +We never refer to individual programs as “GNU/<i>name</i>.” When a program +is a GNU package, we may call it “GNU <i>name</i>.” <p> GNU, the operating system, is made up of many different programs. Some of the programs in GNU were written as part of the GNU Project or @@ -1195,17 +1231,17 @@ everything had to be written afresh. <p> No code in GNU comes from Unix, but GNU is a Unix-compatible system; therefore, many of the ideas and specifications of GNU do come from -Unix. The name “GNU”, which stands for “GNU's Not -Unix”, is a humorous way of giving credit to Unix for this, +Unix. The name “GNU,” which stands for “GNU's Not +Unix,” is a humorous way of giving credit to Unix for this, following a hacker tradition of recursive acronyms that started in the 70s.</p> <p> The first such recursive acronym was TINT, “TINT Is Not -TECO”. The author of TINT wrote another implementation of TECO +TECO.” The author of TINT wrote another implementation of TECO (there were already many of them, for various systems), but instead of -calling it by a dull name like “<em>somethingorother</em> TECO”, he +calling it by a dull name like “<em>somethingorother</em> TECO,” he thought of a clever amusing name. (That's what hacking -means: <a href="http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html">playful +means: <a href="https://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html">playful cleverness</a>.)</p> <p> Other hackers enjoyed that name so much that we imitated the approach. @@ -1213,7 +1249,7 @@ It became a tradition that, when you were writing from scratch a program that was similar to some existing program (let's imagine its name was “Klever”), you could give it a recursive acronym name, such as “MINK” for “MINK Is Not Klever.” In this same spirit we called our -replacement for Unix “GNU's Not Unix”.</p> +replacement for Unix “GNU's Not Unix.”</p> <p> Historically, AT&T which developed Unix did not want anyone to give it credit by using “Unix” in the name of a similar @@ -1221,7 +1257,7 @@ system, not even in a system 99% copied from Unix. AT&T actually threatened to sue anyone giving AT&T credit in that way. This is why each of the various modified versions of Unix (all proprietary, like Unix) had a completely different name that didn't include -“Unix”.</p> +“Unix.”</p> </dd> <dt id="bsd">Should we say “GNU/BSD” @@ -1231,7 +1267,7 @@ too? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#bsd">#bsd</a>)</span></dt> We don't call the BSD systems (FreeBSD, etc.) “GNU/BSD” systems, because that term does not fit the history of the BSD systems. <p> -The BSD system was developed by UC Berkeley as non-free software in +The BSD system was developed by UC Berkeley as nonfree software in the 80s, and became free in the early 90s. A free operating system that exists today is almost certainly either a variant of the GNU system, or a kind of BSD system.</p> @@ -1252,7 +1288,7 @@ The connection between GNU/Linux and GNU is much closer, and that's why the name “GNU/Linux” is appropriate for it.</p> <p> There is a version of GNU which uses the kernel from NetBSD. Its -developers call it “Debian GNU/NetBSD”, but “GNU/kernelofNetBSD” +developers call it “Debian GNU/NetBSD,” but “GNU/kernelofNetBSD” would be more accurate, since NetBSD is an entire system, not just the kernel. This is not a BSD system, since most of the system is the same as the GNU/Linux system.</p> @@ -1262,22 +1298,24 @@ is the same as the GNU/Linux system.</p> on Windows, does that mean I am running a GNU/Windows system? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#othersys">#othersys</a>)</span></dt> <dd> -Not in the same sense that we mean by “GNU/Linux”. The tools of GNU +<p> +Not in the same sense that we mean by “GNU/Linux.” The tools of GNU are just a part of the GNU software, which is just a part of the GNU system, and underneath them you would still have another complete operating system which has no code in common with GNU. All in all, -that's a very different situation from GNU/Linux. +that's a very different situation from GNU/Linux.</p> </dd> <dt id="justlinux">Can't Linux be used without GNU? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#justlinux">#justlinux</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> Linux is used by itself, or with small other programs, in some appliances. These small software systems are a far cry from the GNU/Linux system. Users do not install them on PCs, for instance, and would find them rather disappointing. It is useful to say that these appliances run just Linux, to show how different those small platforms -are from GNU/Linux. +are from GNU/Linux.</p> </dd> <dt id="howmuch">How much of the GNU system is needed for the system @@ -1312,7 +1350,7 @@ Android is very different from the GNU/Linux system—because the two have very little code in common. In fact, the only thing they have in common is Linux.</p> <p> -If you call the whole GNU/Linux system “Linux”, +If you call the whole GNU/Linux system “Linux,” you will find it necessary to say things like, “Android contains Linux, but it isn't Linux, because it doesn't have the usual Linux [sic] libraries and utilities [meaning the GNU system].”</p> @@ -1331,22 +1369,22 @@ Far from it. That usage is so strained that people will not understand the intended meaning. <p> The public will find it very strange to speak of using Android as -“using Linux”. It's like having a conversation, then +“using Linux.” It's like having a conversation, then saying you were conversing with the person's intestines or the person's circulatory system.</p> <p> The public <em>will</em> understand the idea of “using Linux” when it's really GNU/Linux, by way of the usual misunderstanding: thinking of the whole system as -“Linux”.</p> +“Linux.”</p> <p> Use of Android and use of GNU/Linux are totally different, as different as driving a car and riding a bicycle. The fact that the first two both contain Linux is irrelevant to using them, just as the fact that a car and a bicycle both have a structure of metal is irrelevant to using those two. If you wish to talk about using cars -and bikes, you wouldn't speak of “riding metal objects” -— not unless you're playing games with the reader. You would +and bikes, you wouldn't speak of “riding metal objects”—not +unless you're playing games with the reader. You would say, “using cars and bikes.” Likewise, the clear way to talk about using GNU/Linux and Android is to say “using GNU/Linux and Android.”</p> @@ -1367,10 +1405,10 @@ ethical principle, which is why the public does not connect the name “Linux” with that principle. <p> Linus publicly states his disagreement with the free software -movement's ideals. He developed non-free software in his job for many +movement's ideals. He developed nonfree software in his job for many years (and said so to a large audience at a “Linux”World show), and publicly invited fellow developers of Linux, the kernel, to use -non-free software to work on it with him. He goes even further, and +nonfree software to work on it with him. He goes even further, and rebukes people who suggest that engineers and scientists should consider social consequences of our technical work—rejecting the lessons society learned from the development of the atom bomb.</p> @@ -1389,11 +1427,12 @@ stems from ideals of freedom, not from his views.</p> work as GNU? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#claimlinux">#claimlinux</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> It would be wrong, so we don't do that. Torvalds' work is Linux, the kernel; we are careful not to attribute that work to the GNU Project -or label it as “GNU”. When we talk about the whole +or label it as “GNU.” When we talk about the whole system, the name “GNU/Linux” gives him a share of the -credit. +credit.</p> </dd> @@ -1401,12 +1440,14 @@ credit. agree that Linux is just the kernel? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#linusagreed">#linusagreed</a>)</span></dt> <dd> -<p>He recognized this at the beginning. The earliest Linux release notes -said, <a -href="http://ftp.funet.fi/pub/linux/historical/kernel/old-versions/RELNOTES-0.01"> -“Most of the tools used with linux are GNU software and are under the +<p>He recognized this at the beginning. The <a +href="https://ftp.funet.fi/pub/linux/historical/kernel/old-versions/RELNOTES-0.01"> +earliest Linux release notes</a> said:</p> +<blockquote><p> +Most of the tools used with linux are GNU software and are under the GNU copyleft. These tools aren't in the distribution - ask me (or GNU) -for more info”</a>.</p> +for more info. +</p></blockquote> </dd> <dt id="finishhurd">Why not finish the GNU Hurd kernel, release the GNU system @@ -1421,7 +1462,7 @@ kernel is used with it. a big job, and it's not clearly necessary. The only thing ethically wrong with Linux as a kernel is its inclusion of firmware “blobs”; the best fix for that problem -is <a href="http://fsf.org/campaigns/priority-projects"> developing +is <a href="https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/priority-projects"> developing free replacement for the blobs</a>.</p> </dd> @@ -1430,12 +1471,13 @@ free replacement for the blobs</a>.</p> it? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#lost">#lost</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> This isn't a battle, it is a campaign of education. What to call the system is not a single decision, to be made at one moment by “society”: each person, each organization, can decide what -name to use. You can't make others say “GNU/Linux”, but +name to use. You can't make others say “GNU/Linux,” but you can decide to call the system “GNU/Linux” -yourself—and by doing so, you will help educate others. +yourself—and by doing so, you will help educate others.</p> </dd> <dt id="whatgood">Society has made its @@ -1443,14 +1485,15 @@ yourself—and by doing so, you will help educate others. “GNU/Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#whatgood">#whatgood</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> This is not an all-or-nothing situation: correct and incorrect pictures are being spread more or less by various people. If you call -the system “GNU/Linux”, you will help others learn the system's true +the system “GNU/Linux,” you will help others learn the system's true history, origin, and reason for being. You can't correct the misnomer everywhere on your own, any more than we can, but you can help. If -only a few hundred people see you use the term “GNU/Linux”, you will +only a few hundred people see you use the term “GNU/Linux,” you will have educated a substantial number of people with very little work. -And some of them will spread the correction to others. +And some of them will spread the correction to others.</p> </dd> <dt id="explain">Wouldn't it be better to call @@ -1460,14 +1503,14 @@ And some of them will spread the correction to others. <dd> If you help us by explaining to others in that way, we appreciate your effort, but that is not the best method. It is not as effective as -calling the system “GNU/Linux”, and uses your time inefficiently. +calling the system “GNU/Linux,” and uses your time inefficiently. <p> It is ineffective because it may not sink in, and surely will not propagate. Some of the people who hear your explanation will pay attention, and they may learn a correct picture of the system's origin. But they are unlikely to repeat the explanation to others whenever they talk about the system. They will probably just call it -“Linux”. Without particularly intending to, they will help spread the +“Linux.” Without particularly intending to, they will help spread the incorrect picture.</p> <p> It is inefficient because it takes a lot more time. Saying and @@ -1521,39 +1564,44 @@ Therefore, we will continue trying to correct the misnomer.</p> is it legitimate to rename the operating system? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#rename">#rename</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> We are not renaming anything; we have been calling this system “GNU” ever since we announced it in 1983. The people who tried to rename -it to “Linux” should not have done so.</dd> +it to “Linux” should not have done so.</p> +</dd> <dt id="force">Isn't it wrong to force people to call the system “GNU/Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#force">#force</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> It would be wrong to force them, and we don't try. We call the system -“GNU/Linux”, and we ask you to do it too. +“GNU/Linux,” and we ask you to do it too.</p> </dd> <dt id="whynotsue">Why not sue people who call the whole system “Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#whynotsue">#whynotsue</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> There are no legal grounds to sue them, but since we believe in freedom of speech, we wouldn't want to do that anyway. We ask people -to call the system “GNU/Linux” because that is the right thing to do. +to call the system “GNU/Linux” because that is the right thing to do.</p> </dd> <dt id="require">Shouldn't you put something in the GNU GPL to require people to call the system “GNU”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#require">#require</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> The purpose of the GNU GPL is to protect the users' freedom from those who would make proprietary versions of free software. While it is true that those who call the system “Linux” often do things that limit -the users' freedom, such as bundling non-free software with the -GNU/Linux system or even developing non-free software for such use, +the users' freedom, such as bundling nonfree software with the +GNU/Linux system or even developing nonfree software for such use, the mere act of calling the system “Linux” does not, in itself, deny users their freedom. It seems improper to make the GPL restrict what -name people can use for the system. +name people can use for the system.</p> </dd> <dt id="BSDlicense">Since you objected to the original BSD license's @@ -1572,7 +1620,7 @@ the term “BSD license” without specifying which one.</p> </dd> <dt id="deserve">Since you failed to put - something in the GNU GPL to require people to call the system “GNU”, + something in the GNU GPL to require people to call the system “GNU,” you deserve what happened; why are you complaining now? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#deserve">#deserve</a>)</span></dt> <dd> @@ -1598,20 +1646,22 @@ was legitimate and acceptable.</p> </dd> <dt id="somanyright">Since many people call -it “Linux”, doesn't that make it right? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#somanyright">#somanyright</a>)</span></dt> +it “Linux,” doesn't that make it right? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#somanyright">#somanyright</a>)</span></dt> <dd> -We don't think that the popularity of an error makes it the truth. +<p> +We don't think that the popularity of an error makes it the truth.</p> </dd> <dt id="knownname">Isn't it better to call the system by the name most users already know? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#knownname">#knownname</a>)</span></dt> <dd> +<p> Users are not incapable of learning. Since “GNU/Linux” -includes “Linux”, they will recognize what you're talking +includes “Linux,” they will recognize what you're talking about. If you add “(often erroneously referred to as -‘Linux’)” once in a while, they will all understand. +‘Linux’)” once in a while, they will all understand.</p> </dd> <dt id="winning">Many people care about what's @@ -1621,7 +1671,7 @@ about. If you add “(often erroneously referred to as <dd> To care only about what's convenient or who's winning is an amoral -approach to life. Non-free software is an example of that amoral +approach to life. Nonfree software is an example of that amoral approach and thrives on it. Thus, in the long run it would be self-defeating for us to adopt that approach. We will continue talking in terms of right and wrong. @@ -1631,7 +1681,6 @@ We hope that you are one of those for whom right and wrong do matter.</p> </dl> </div> -</div> </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above --> <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" --> @@ -1680,7 +1729,7 @@ of this article.</p> There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. --> -<p>Copyright © 2001, 2006-2008, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014-2018, 2020, 2021 +<p>Copyright © 2001-2011, 2013-2018, 2020, 2022 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p> <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" @@ -1691,7 +1740,7 @@ Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p> <p class="unprintable">Updated: <!-- timestamp start --> -$Date: 2021/04/07 17:55:36 $ +$Date: 2022/07/27 07:00:34 $ <!-- timestamp end --> </p> </div> |