Re: Hurd FS hierarchy (was Re: LD_LIBRARY_PATH troubles)

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 05:02:20PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Jeroen Dekkers <jeroen@dekkers.cx> writes:
> 
> > A climate is never a reason for not doing the right thing. The only
> > reason the name GNU/Hurd exists is because GNU might be ambigous, but
> > the paragraph before it already speaks about GNU/Linux so that doesn't
> > really matter. We could say "Hurd-based GNU system" in the first line
> > to clear everything up.
> 
> The name GNU/Hurd is clear, convenient, and a proper name for the
> system--sez me, sez RMS, sez just about everyone else.

Could you point me to an article or interview in which RMS says "the
GNU/Hurd system" instead of "the GNU system"?

And I don't really care about what everyone else does, I do something
because I think it's the right thing to do, not because everybody else
says it's the right thing.

> Sometimes we say GNU, sometimes GNU/Hurd.  When we are explicitly
> contrasting a Linux-based system from a Hurd-based system, it is most
> clear to use the two terms GNU/Linux and GNU/Hurd.
> 
> We don't have control over the whole document, but we probably get to
> put what we want in our section, and in our section, I think using the
> more clearly contrasting names is the right thing.

The only reason "GNU/Hurd" exists is to prevent confusion. If there is
no confusion, "GNU/Hurd" is IMHO just an ugly name. I don't see a
reason to hide that GNU/Hurd is GNU's official system.

There is another reason why I call it "GNU" instead of "GNU/Hurd",
there are people who think that "GNU/Hurd" is just ugly and too long
and are referring to the OS as "the Hurd" instead of "GNU". I think
that's a bad habit.

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org  IRC ID: jeroen@openprojects
GNU supporter - http://www.gnu.org

pgpPuhW74dGF2.pgp
Description: PGP signature