From: David Brown on
On 12/08/2010 11:14, mjt wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:01:34 +0200
> David Brown<david(a)westcontrol.removethisbit.com> wrote:
> [snipped]
>> But don't worry about trying to say "GNU/Linux". There are some
>> people who are keen on the term because they feel the work of FSF and
>> GNU is under-appreciated - they have a fair point, but the term is
>> too cumbersome and hasn't really caught on.
>
> That was my attempt to show the different layers,
> a sort of "long explanation" of your "Ford and cars"
> response (nice analogy, BTW). I do understand folks
> say "Linux" in a generic way, but "Ubuntu and Linux"
> was such a crass statement, I had to jump in :)
>
> And I do understand 98% of folks won't write "GNU/Linux",
> I felt it important to show the distinctions.
>

Fair enough.

I was trying to explain the situation a little more to the O/P, since he
seems unfamiliar with the terms and how Linux systems fit together. I
wasn't trying to correct you - just to expand on your post.

>> It's also unfair to
>> those who wrote everything else that goes into a typical Linux
>> system. While it's true that a bare Linux kernel is little use
>> without all the GNU programs around it, the most visible programs in
>> a typical Linux system are neither Linux nor GNU. Linux + GNU
>> programs are little real-world use without X, Window managers, server
>> software (web, database, etc.), application programs, etc.
>
> I certainly wasn't trying to exclude all the fine folks who've
> brought "everything else" to make a Linux system more usable.
>
> GNU/Linux can be a usable system. I think most would agree
> that "Linux + GNU + X, Window managers, server software
> (web, database, etc.), application programs, etc." is the
> "distribution" (distro) layer.
>

GNU + Linux is certainly usable for some things - once you've got
virtual consoles, emacs, and gcc, what more do you need? But for most
uses, you either have a server system or you have a gui, and thus that
is what most people refer to as being part of their Linux system.
From: Kenny McCormack on
In article <4c63aa8b$0$14523$8404b019(a)news.wineasy.se>,
David Brown <david(a)westcontrol.removethisbit.com> wrote:
....
>neither Linux nor GNU. Linux + GNU programs are little real-world use
>without X, Window managers, server software (web, database, etc.),
>application programs, etc.

Of course, now you're going to hear from all the people who, like me,
use Linux daily but don't use any of:

X, Window managers, server software (web, database, etc.),

Well, OK, I guess I do use "etc", since that could mean anything...

--
"We should always be disposed to believe that which appears to us to be
white is really black, if the hierarchy of the church so decides."

- Saint Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556) Founder of the Jesuit Order -

From: David Brown on
On 12/08/2010 18:35, Kenny McCormack wrote:
> In article<4c63aa8b$0$14523$8404b019(a)news.wineasy.se>,
> David Brown<david(a)westcontrol.removethisbit.com> wrote:
> ...
>> neither Linux nor GNU. Linux + GNU programs are little real-world use
>> without X, Window managers, server software (web, database, etc.),
>> application programs, etc.
>
> Of course, now you're going to hear from all the people who, like me,
> use Linux daily but don't use any of:
>
> X, Window managers, server software (web, database, etc.),
>
> Well, OK, I guess I do use "etc", since that could mean anything...
>

When you've got emacs, who needs anything else :-)

Actually, I know there is plenty of use for such systems - I use several
myself (mostly virtual machines floating around somewhere). My main use
is as build servers - systems with particular versions of gcc
cross-compilers which I access with ssh. It is convenient to keep these
as completely separate machines, and X or other servers would just be a
waste of resources.