Re: Linux isn't an operating system

Mike Kilburn (
Fri, 08 Mar 1996 13:50:11 +0200

> Anyway, I still think the "Linux" part in a typical Linux
> distribution, say RedHat or Slackware, is a bit overadvertised when
> compared to the GNU part. This may not be too disturbing to the

What about bind, sendmail, inn, apatche, wu-ftpd, and everthing else.
When I look at the packages on the GNU ftp site they dont make up
the majority of RedHat. We dont use GNU libc do we? I dont use emacs.
I do use GCC and bash and I like them but Its not the bulk of the RedHat

> Quite many end users feel they are just using Linux. And it is not
> uncommon for people who see a Linux system for the first time to
> comment something like "Cool! Think, Torvalds has made all this. He
> must be a genius."

I guess some people think Bill Gates wrote Win95.

> "GNU" in the name of the system would perhaps correct the both errors
> inherent in this kind of view. At least it would raise the question
> "What GNU?".

Why should we care about GNU so much. Is not sendmail just as important
to some Linux users. Of course GNU should get credit, just like every one
else that make Linux possible. What about Minix? Would Linux be around
if there was no Minix? Does RMS want every system that gains from his work
to give him credit? If so, why is that not part of his GPL?