[linux-audio-user] linux audio wiki

[Florian Schmidt]

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 23:58:24 +1000
"Shayne O'Connor" <forums at machinehasnoagenda.com> wrote:

> > You think that, to some fuzzily defined extent, we should say
> > "GNU/Linux" because that's The Right Thing.  This is ideological.
> > 
> 
> No - because that's what it *is*.

Hi,

i don't agree at all. Sure GNU tools are an important set of tools for
every Linux distribution. Some might even argue, they are essential.
Linux (the kernel) would probably not even exist without the gcc being
available. Also glibc is an essential part of almost every linux
distribution (plus all the network-, filesystem-, and other tools kindly
provided by the GNU project). 

But please, this is free software. I can call my project based on GNU
software whatever i want to call it. Everyone who tries to force me to
use a name different from the one i chose can (from my point of view)
also talk to a brickwall instead. It doesn't have any relevance to me.

Sure, part of the GPL is afaik that when i base my work on someone
else's or even only redistribute someone else's GPL'ed work i have to
make sure i don't obscure authorship. This is in no way happening in any
of the Linux distributions. The gcc is still the GNU C Compiler, the
glibc is still the GNU libc. So i don't see what point Stallmann and all
the other GNU/Linux evangelists try to make. Sure, it's courtesy to make
GNU prominent in the name, as GNU is a major contribution to all Linux
distributions, but there's no legal or even strong ethic reason to do
so.

You wanted your software to be free. Now it is free and you have to live
with it :) Stop complaining.

It would also probably help if the GNU/Linux evangelists would simply
say: "Hey it would be kind of you if you mentioned GNU in your product
name, but of course, you don't have to. It's free software!"

Please don't make it a religious issue.

Regards,
Flo

-- 
Palimm Palimm!
http://tapas.affenbande.org