New Page 1

LA GRAMMATICA DI ENGLISH GRATIS IN VERSIONE MOBILE • TEL. 375-5186291 •   INFORMATIVA PRIVACY

  Telefono e SMS: 375-5186291       NUOVA SEZIONE ELINGUE
EMAIL:

 

Selettore risorse   

   

 

                                         IL Metodo  |  Grammatica  |  RISPOSTE GRAMMATICALI  |  Multiblog  |  INSEGNARE AGLI ADULTI  |  INSEGNARE AI BAMBINI  |  AudioBooks  |  RISORSE SFiziosE  |  Articoli  |  Tips  | testi pAralleli  |  VIDEO SOTTOTITOLATI
                                                                                         ESERCIZI :   Serie 1 - 2 - 3  - 4 - 5  SERVIZI:   Pronunciatore di inglese - Dizionario - Convertitore IPA/UK - IPA/US - Convertitore di valute in lire ed euro                                              

 

 

WIKIBOOKS
DISPONIBILI
?????????

ART
- Great Painters
BUSINESS&LAW
- Accounting
- Fundamentals of Law
- Marketing
- Shorthand
CARS
- Concept Cars
GAMES&SPORT
- Videogames
- The World of Sports

COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY
- Blogs
- Free Software
- Google
- My Computer

- PHP Language and Applications
- Wikipedia
- Windows Vista

EDUCATION
- Education
LITERATURE
- Masterpieces of English Literature
LINGUISTICS
- American English

- English Dictionaries
- The English Language

MEDICINE
- Medical Emergencies
- The Theory of Memory
MUSIC&DANCE
- The Beatles
- Dances
- Microphones
- Musical Notation
- Music Instruments
SCIENCE
- Batteries
- Nanotechnology
LIFESTYLE
- Cosmetics
- Diets
- Vegetarianism and Veganism
TRADITIONS
- Christmas Traditions
NATURE
- Animals

- Fruits And Vegetables



ARTICLES IN THE BOOK

  1. Academic Free License
  2. Adaptive Public License
  3. Advogato
  4. Affero General Public License
  5. Africa Source
  6. AKademy
  7. Alternative terms for free software
  8. Anti-copyright notice
  9. Apache License
  10. Apache Software Foundation
  11. APESOL
  12. Apple Public Source License
  13. Artistic License
  14. Association For Free Software
  15. August Penguin
  16. Benetech
  17. Benevolent Dictator for Life
  18. BerliOS
  19. Binary blob
  20. BK02
  21. Blender Foundation
  22. Bruce Perens' Open Source Series
  23. BSD licenses
  24. CeCILL
  25. CE Linux Forum
  26. Clarkson Open Source Institute
  27. Code Breakers
  28. CodePlex
  29. Collaborative software development model
  30. Collaborative Source license
  31. Common Development and Distribution License
  32. Common Public License
  33. Comparison of free software hosting facilities
  34. CONSOL
  35. Copycenter
  36. Copyleft
  37. Creative Commons licenses
  38. Debconf
  39. Debian Free Software Guidelines
  40. Debian Manifesto
  41. Desktop Developers' Conference
  42. Eclipse Foundation
  43. Eclipse Public License
  44. Enterprise open source journal
  45. European Union Public Licence
  46. Everybody Loves Eric Raymond
  47. Forum Internacional Software Livre
  48. Fedora Project
  49. FOSDEM
  50. FOSS.IN
  51. Fossap
  52. Frameworx License
  53. Free content
  54. Free Culture movement
  55. Freedesktop.org
  56. Freely redistributable software
  57. Freepository
  58. Free software
  59. Free Software Award for Projects of Social Benefit
  60. Free software community
  61. Free Software Directory
  62. Free Software Foundation
  63. Free Software Foundation Europe
  64. Free Software Foundation Latin America
  65. Free Software Foundation of India
  66. Free Software Initiative of Japan
  67. Free software license
  68. Free Software Magazine
  69. Free software movement
  70. Free Software Song
  71. Free Standards Group
  72. FSF Award for the Advancement of Free Software
  73. GCC Summit
  74. Gna.org
  75. GNAT Modified General Public License
  76. Gnits Standards
  77. GnomeFiles
  78. GNOME Foundation
  79. GNU Coding Standards
  80. GNU Free Documentation License
  81. GNU General Public License
  82. GNU Lesser General Public License
  83. GNU Manifesto
  84. GNU Savannah
  85. GNU Simpler Free Documentation License
  86. Google Code
  87. Google Summer of Code
  88. Go Open Source
  89. GRASS GIS
  90. Gratis versus Libre
  91. Groklaw
  92. GUADEC
  93. Halloween documents
  94. Hamakor
  95. Historical Permission Notice and Disclaimer
  96. Homesteading the Noosphere
  97. Hurd User Group
  98. IBM Public License
  99. IBM Type-III Library
  100. Intel Open Source License
  101. International Open Source Network
  102. Irish Free Software Organisation
  103. ISC licence
  104. Jargon File
  105. Jimbo Wales
  106. KDE Dot News
  107. KernelTrap
  108. LAMP
  109. LaTeX Project Public License
  110. League for Programming Freedom
  111. Leonard H. Tower Jr.
  112. libpng
  113. Libre Software Meeting
  114. Linus's Law
  115. Linus Torvalds
  116. Linux.conf.au
  117. Linux conference
  118. Linux Expo
  119. Linux Gazette
  120. Linux International
  121. Linux Journal
  122. Linux Kongress
  123. Linux naming controversy
  124. LinuxQuestions.org
  125. LinuxTag
  126. Linux User Group
  127. LinuxWorld Conference and Expo
  128. List of software that uses the MIT License
  129. LiveJournal
  130. Lucent Public License
  131. LXer
  132. MIT License
  133. MozBin
  134. Mozdev.org
  135. Mozilla Add-ons
  136. Mozilla Foundation
  137. Mozilla Public License
  138. MozillaZine
  139. MyOSS
  140. NetHack General Public License
  141. Netscape Public License
  142. NewsForge
  143. New Zealand Open Source Society
  144. NonProfit Open Source Initiative
  145. Non-proprietary software
  146. Nupedia Open Content License
  147. ObjectWeb
  148. Ohio LinuxFest
  149. Ohloh
  150. O3 Magazine
  151. Open Audio License
  152. OpenCola
  153. Open content
  154. Open design
  155. OpenDocument Format Alliance
  156. OpenLP
  157. Open outsourcing
  158. Open Security Foundation
  159. Open Software License
  160. Open-source advocacy
  161. Open Source Applications Foundation
  162. Open-source culture
  163. Open Source Definition
  164. Open Source Developers' Conference
  165. Open-source evangelist
  166. Open source funding
  167. Open Source Geospatial Foundation
  168. Open Source Initiative
  169. Open source movement
  170. Open source movie
  171. Open-source software
  172. Open source software development
  173. Open source software development method
  174. Open Source Software Institute
  175. Open source teaching
  176. Open source vs. closed source
  177. Open-sourcing
  178. O'Reilly Open Source Convention
  179. Organisation for Free Software in Education and Teaching
  180. OSDL
  181. Ottawa Linux Symposium
  182. Patent Commons
  183. PHP License
  184. Pionia
  185. Pionia Organization
  186. Proprietary software
  187. Protecting the Virtual Commons
  188. Public Documentation License
  189. Public-domain equivalent license
  190. Python License
  191. Python Software Foundation License
  192. Q Public License
  193. RealNetworks Public Source License
  194. Reciprocal Public License
  195. Red Hat
  196. Revolution OS
  197. Richard Stallman
  198. RubyForge
  199. Sarovar
  200. Savane
  201. SIL Open Font License
  202. Simputer General Public License
  203. SIPfoundry
  204. Slashdot
  205. Sleepycat License
  206. Software Freedom Day
  207. Software Freedom Law Center
  208. Software in the Public Interest
  209. SourceForge
  210. Spread Firefox
  211. Sun Industry Standards Source License
  212. Sun Public License
  213. Sybase Open Watcom Public License
  214. Tanenbaum-Torvalds debate
  215. Tectonic Magazine
  216. The Cathedral and the Bazaar
  217. The Freedom Toaster
  218. The Free Software Definition
  219. The Perl Foundation
  220. The Right to Read
  221. The Summit Open Source Development Group
  222. Tigris.org
  223. Tivoization
  224. Tux
  225. Tux Magazine
  226. Ubuntu Foundation
  227. Use of Free and Open Source Software in the U.S. Department of Defense
  228. Vores Ol
  229. W3C Software Notice and License
  230. Webgpl
  231. What the Hack
  232. Wizards of OS
  233. WTFPL
  234. X.Org Foundation
  235. Xiph.Org Foundation
  236. Yet Another Perl Conference
  237. Yogurt

 

 
CONDIZIONI DI USO DI QUESTO SITO
L'utente può utilizzare il nostro sito solo se comprende e accetta quanto segue:

  • Le risorse linguistiche gratuite presentate in questo sito si possono utilizzare esclusivamente per uso personale e non commerciale con tassativa esclusione di ogni condivisione comunque effettuata. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. La riproduzione anche parziale è vietata senza autorizzazione scritta.
  • Il nome del sito EnglishGratis è esclusivamente un marchio e un nome di dominio internet che fa riferimento alla disponibilità sul sito di un numero molto elevato di risorse gratuite e non implica dunque alcuna promessa di gratuità relativamente a prodotti e servizi nostri o di terze parti pubblicizzati a mezzo banner e link, o contrassegnati chiaramente come prodotti a pagamento (anche ma non solo con la menzione "Annuncio pubblicitario"), o comunque menzionati nelle pagine del sito ma non disponibili sulle pagine pubbliche, non protette da password, del sito stesso.
  • La pubblicità di terze parti è in questo momento affidata al servizio Google AdSense che sceglie secondo automatismi di carattere algoritmico gli annunci di terze parti che compariranno sul nostro sito e sui quali non abbiamo alcun modo di influire. Non siamo quindi responsabili del contenuto di questi annunci e delle eventuali affermazioni o promesse che in essi vengono fatte!
  • L'utente, inoltre, accetta di tenerci indenni da qualsiasi tipo di responsabilità per l'uso - ed eventuali conseguenze di esso - degli esercizi e delle informazioni linguistiche e grammaticali contenute sul siti. Le risposte grammaticali sono infatti improntate ad un criterio di praticità e pragmaticità più che ad una completezza ed esaustività che finirebbe per frastornare, per l'eccesso di informazione fornita, il nostro utente. La segnalazione di eventuali errori è gradita e darà luogo ad una immediata rettifica.

     

    ENGLISHGRATIS.COM è un sito personale di
    Roberto Casiraghi e Crystal Jones
    Tel. e SMS: 375-5186291 - Email:

    Roberto Casiraghi           
    INFORMATIVA SULLA PRIVACY              Crystal Jones


    Siti amici:  Lonweb Daisy Stories English4Life Scuolitalia
    Sito segnalato da INGLESE.IT

 
 



FREE SOFTWARE CULTURE
This article is from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy

All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_License 

GNU/Linux naming controversy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
FSF artwork of the gnu (GNU mascot) and the penguin Tux (Linux kernel mascot) representing their viewpoint on "GNU/Linux". The GNU General Public License (GPL), which is used by the Linux kernel as well as by most GNU software, armors both characters.
FSF artwork of the gnu (GNU mascot) and the penguin Tux (Linux kernel mascot) representing their viewpoint on "GNU/Linux". The GNU General Public License (GPL), which is used by the Linux kernel as well as by most GNU software, armors both characters.

GNU/Linux is the term promoted by the Free Software Foundation (FSF), its founder Richard Stallman, and its supporters, for operating systems that include the FSF's GNU utilities and the Linux kernel. Debian GNU/Linux uses this term in their name, but most other people simply use the term "Linux" for the whole system.

The FSF argues for the term GNU/Linux because GNU was a longstanding project to develop a free operating system, of which they argue the kernel was only the final small piece. Proponents of the Linux term contend that users and developers have overwhelmingly chosen to keep this shorter name and, since GNU is but one of many contributors to the operating system as a whole, a name change is not justified.

A Linux-based operating system has many components, including both the Linux kernel and software developed by the GNU project, as well as substantial amounts of software such as the X Window System by other authors. The Linux kernel has been reported to be the largest single component, while it is smaller than the total amount of code developed by the GNU project in a typical Linux distribution.[1] Determining exactly what constitutes the "operating system" per se is a matter of continuing debate, however, since there is no single authority to determine the demarcation.

History

The history of Linux is closely tied to that of the GNU operating system. Plans for GNU were made in 1983 and in September of that year they were announced publicly. Software development work began in January 1984. GNU was to be a complete Unix-like operating system composed entirely of free software. By 1991, when the first version of the Linux kernel was released by Linus Torvalds, the GNU mid-level portions of the operating system were almost complete, and the upper level could be supplied by the X Window System, but the lower level (kernel, device drivers, system-level utilities and daemons) was still mostly lacking. The early Linux kernel developers adapted Linux specifically to work with GNU, and later, when the GNU developers learned of Linux, they adapted parts of GNU to work with it. Linux thus filled the last major gap in the GNU operating system. The GNU kernel, GNU Hurd, was still in its infancy. The Hurd followed an ambitious design which proved unexpectedly difficult to implement and has only been marginally usable.

In 1992, the Yggdrasil Linux distribution adopted the name "Linux/GNU/X". The name "GNU/Linux" was first used by Debian in 1994. In GNU's June 1994 Bulletin, Linux is referred to as a "free Unix clone (with many GNU utilities and libraries)". In the January 1995 edition, the term "GNU/Linux" was used instead. In May 1996, Stallman released Emacs 19.31 with the system target "Linux" changed to "Lignux", also suggesting the alternatives of "Linux-based GNU system" or "GNU/Linux system". Stallman later used "GNU/Linux" exclusively.

Arguments for "GNU/Linux"

The FSF advocates "GNU/Linux" not simply because of the large number of GNU components used in Linux-based systems or the quantity of GNU source code, but because the goal of the GNU project was specifically to develop a complete operating system:

So if you were going to pick a name for the system based on who wrote the programs in the system, the most appropriate single choice would be GNU. But we don't think that is the right way to consider the question. The GNU Project was not, is not, a project to develop specific software packages. [...] Many people have made major contributions to the free software in the system, and they all deserve credit. But the reason it is an integrated system — and not just a collection of useful programs — is because the GNU Project set out to make it one. We made a list of the programs needed to make a complete free system, and we systematically wrote, or found people to write, everything on the list.[2]

The FSF argues that the name issue is important as a way of crediting both the technical contribution of the GNU project and the idealism of the GNU free-software philosophy (as opposed to the open-source movement):

Calling the system GNU/Linux recognizes the role that our idealism played in building our community, and helps the public recognize the practical importance of these ideals.[3]

Calling this variant of the GNU system "Linux" plays into the hands of people who choose their software based only on technical advantage, not caring whether it respects their freedom.[4]

The ordinary understanding of "operating system" includes both the kernel — the specific subsystem that directly interfaces with the hardware — and the "userland" software that is employed by the user and by application software to control the computer. Moreover, both the name "GNU" and the name "Linux" are intentionally related to the name "Unix", and Unix has always conceptually included the C library and userland tools as well as the kernel. In the 1991 release notes for versions 0.01 to 0.11 of Linux (which was not released under the GNU General Public License until version 0.12), Torvalds wrote:

Sadly, a kernel by itself gets you nowhere. To get a working system you need a shell, compilers, a library etc. These are separate parts and may be under a stricter (or even looser) copyright. 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.[5]

The use of the word "Linux" to refer to the kernel, the operating system, and entire distributions, often leads to confusion about the distinctions between the three. (Many of the important GNU packages are a key part of almost every Linux distribution.) Media sources frequently make erroneous statements such as claiming that the entire Linux operating system (rather than simply the kernel) was written from scratch by Torvalds in 1991; that Torvalds directs the development of other components such as graphical interfaces or the GNU tools; or that new releases of the kernel involve a similar degree of user-visible change as do new versions of proprietary operating systems such as Microsoft Windows, where many things besides the kernel change simultaneously.

Because of this confusion, legal threats and public relations campaigns apparently directed against the kernel, such as those launched by the SCO Group or the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (AdTI), have been misinterpreted by many commentators who assume that the whole operating system is being targeted. These organisations have even been accused of deliberately exploiting this confusion:

Generally, SCO's Caldera v IBM Complaint is vague and confusing as to whether the accusations involve the Linux kernel, the GNU/Linux operating system, Linux distributions, Linux applications, or whatever. (Mike Angelo, MozillaQuest Magazine, 2003)[6]

SCO has used "Linux" to mean "all free software," or "all free software constituting a UNIX-like operating system." This confusion, which the Free Software Foundation warned against in the past, is here shown to have the misleading consequences the Foundation has often predicted. (Eben Moglen, 2003)[7]

I guess we can all be glad the world found it so hard to say GNU/Linux, because SCO fell right into the pit, equating Linux, the kernel, with GNU/Linux, the everything, kernel plus the applications. (Pamela Jones, Groklaw, 2003)[8]

In particular, Stallman criticized the [Ken Brown/AdTI] report for capitalizing on common confusion between the Linux kernel, which Stallman says "Linus really wrote," with the full GNU operating system and associated software, which can be and generally is used with the Linux kernel. (Lisa Stapleton, LinuxInsider, 2004)[9]

In response to suggestions that Stallman's renaming efforts stem from egotism or personal pique, RMS has responded that his interest is not in giving credit to himself, but to the GNU Project:

Some people think that it's because I want my ego to be fed. Of course, I'm not asking you to call it "Stallmanix".[10]

Stallman has admitted to irritation, although he believes it to be justified:

If this thread is annoying, please imagine what it is like to see an idealistic project stymied and made ineffective, because people don't usually give it the credit for what it has done. If you're an idealist like me, that can ruin your whole decade.[11]

In response to another common argument (see below), the FSF acknowledges that many people have contributed to GNU/Linux and that a short name cannot credit all of them, but argues that this cannot justify calling the system "Linux":

Since a long name such as GNU/X11/Apache/Linux/TeX/Perl/Python/FreeCiv becomes absurd, at some point you will have to set a threshold and omit the names of the many other secondary contributions. There is no one obvious right place to set the threshold, so wherever you set it, we won't argue against it ... But one name that cannot result from concerns of fairness 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).[3]

Arguments for "Linux"

"Linux" is by far the most widespread name,[12] and most people therefore simply adopt this usage, while references to the naming controversy appear only infrequently in mainstream sources. "Linux" has the most historical momentum because it is the name Torvalds has used for the combined system since 1991, while Stallman only began asking people to call the system "GNU/Linux" in the mid 1990s, some time after the "Linux" name had already become popular. "Linux" is shorter and easier to say than "GNU/Linux", particularly given Stallman's suggested pronunciation (in IPA) of [gəˈnu slæʃ 'lɪnəks] or [gəˈnu plʌs 'lɪnəks].


Eric S. Raymond writes (in the "Linux" entry of the Jargon File):

Some people object that the name "Linux" should be used to refer only to the kernel, not the entire operating system. This claim is a proxy for an underlying territorial dispute; people who insist on the term GNU/Linux want the FSF to get most of the credit for Linux because RMS [Stallman] and friends wrote many of its user-level tools. Neither this theory nor the term GNU/Linux has gained more than minority acceptance.

Linus Torvalds has said in the documentary Revolution OS, when asked if the name GNU/Linux was justified:

Well, I think it's justified, but it's justified if you actually make a GNU distribution of Linux ... the same way that I think that "Red Hat Linux" is fine, or "SuSE Linux" or "Debian Linux," because if you actually make your own distribution of Linux, you get to name the thing, but calling Linux in general "GNU Linux" I think is just ridiculous.[13]

An editorial in the Linux Journal expressed the common speculation that Stallman's advocacy of the combined name is an attempt to unfairly ride on the coattails of Linux's fame:

Perhaps RMS is frustrated because Linus got the glory for what RMS wanted to do.[14]

(See above for Stallman's response.) The same Linux Journal article quotes Linus Torvalds as saying:

Umm, this discussion has gone on quite long enough, thank you very much. It doesn't really matter what people call Linux, as long as credit is given where credit is due (on both sides). Personally, I'll very much continue to call it "Linux".[15]

In a similar vein, the debate over the name for the operating system is sometimes characterized as a trivial distraction; e.g. John C. Dvorak wrote:

Unfortunately, the Linux community spends too much of its energy on things such as nomenclature (like the name GNU/Linux versus Linux).[16]

Others have suggested that, regardless of the merits, Stallman's persistence in what sometimes seems a lost cause makes him and GNU look bad. For example, Larry McVoy (author of the proprietary software Bitkeeper, once used to manage Linux kernel development) opined that "claiming credit only makes one look foolish and greedy".[17]

Many users and vendors who prefer the name "Linux" point to the inclusion of non-GNU, non-kernel tools such as the Apache HTTP Server, the X Window System or the K Desktop Environment in end-user operating systems based on the Linux kernel. As stated by Jim Gettys, originator of X:

There are lots of people on this bus; I don't hear a clamor of support that GNU is more essential than many of the other components; can't take a wheel away, and end up with a functional vehicle, or an engine, or the seats. I recommend you be happy we have a bus.[18]

(See the FSF response above, which acknowledges practical limits in credits but draws a different conclusion.)

In mainstream usage, the name "Linux" on its own is often used as the standard example of the concept of software or other content that may be freely modified and redistributed, even if such usages generally do not mention GNU or "free software" specifically.

Cases where "GNU/Linux" is inapplicable

In some embedded systems such as handheld devices, the Linux kernel is used with few or no components of GNU, with alternatives like uClibc and BusyBox replacing the GNU tools, or even a single application running as process 1 on a bare kernel. Everyone, including the FSF, agrees that "GNU/Linux" is not an appropriate name in such circumstances.[3] Almost all Linux-based desktops and servers do use the GNU components, such as glibc (the GNU C Library), coreutils, and bash.

Pronunciation

Although "GNU/Linux" is often pronounced IPA pronunciation: [gəˈnu 'lɪnəks], "GNU Linux", Stallman has advocated explicit pronunciation of the slash to prevent the confusing implication that the Linux kernel itself is a GNU project:

I prefer to pronounce it GNU-slash-Linux, or GNU-plus-Linux. The reason is when you say GNU-Linux it is very much prone to suggest a misleading interpretation. After all, we have GNU Emacs which is the version of Emacs which was developed for GNU. If you say "GNU Linux", people will think it means a version of Linux that was developed for GNU. Which is not the fact.[19]

Given that Stallman pronounces GNU as IPA pronunciation: [gəˈnu],[10] this would make it [gəˈnu slæʃ 'lɪnəks] or [gəˈnu plʌs 'lɪnəks].

See also

 
  • Alternative terms for free software
  • GNU Hurd
  • GNU/NetBSD
  • GNU/kFreeBSD
  • GNU/Solaris
  • List of GNU packages
  • Metonymy and synecdoche (the general concept of using the name of a part as the name for the whole)

References

  1. ^ David A. Wheeler, "More Than a Gigabuck: Estimating GNU/Linux's Size" (29 July, 2002).
  2. ^ Richard Stallman, "Linux and the GNU Project"
  3. ^ a b c GNU/Linux FAQ, the Free Software Foundation's responses to common objections to the "GNU/Linux" name.
  4. ^ Richard Stallman, Linux, GNU, and freedom (2002).
  5. ^ Linus Torvalds, "Notes for linux release 0.01" (September 1991).
  6. ^ Mike Angelo, "SCO-Caldera v IBM," MozillaQuest Magazine, 28 April 2003)
  7. ^ Eben Moglen, "FSF Statement on SCO v IBM", 27 June 2003.
  8. ^ Pamela Jones, "Moglen: SCO Is Guilty of What the RIAA Calls Stealing", Groklaw (31 October 2003).
  9. ^ Lisa Stapleton, "Stallman: Accusatory Report Deliberately Confuses", LinuxInsider (27 May 2004).
  10. ^ a b Richard Stallman, "Free Software: Freedom and Cooperation", transcript of speech at New York University in New York, New York (29 May 2001).
  11. ^ Richard Stallman, "Re: GNU/Linux", linux-kernel mailing list (3 April 1999).
  12. ^ http://www.google.com/trends?q=GNU%2FLinux%2C+Linux
  13. ^ Moore, J.T.S. (Produced, Written, and Directed). (2001). Revolution OS [DVD].
  14. ^ "From the Publisher: On the Politics of Freedom", Linux Journal #30 (Oct 1996).
  15. ^ Linus Torvalds, "Lignux, what's the matter with you people?", comp.os.linux.misc newsgroup (3 June 1996).
  16. ^ John C. Dvorak, "Is Linux Your next OS?", PC Magazine (5 March 2002).
  17. ^ Larry McVoy, "Re: GNU/Linux", linux-kernel mailing list (3 April 1999).
  18. ^ Jim Gettys, Re: GNU/Linux, linux-kernel mailing list (5 April 1999).
  19. ^ Jeremy Andrews, Interview: Richard Stallman, KernelTrap.org (January 2. 2005).

Further reading

Online

  • FSF's Position regarding SCO's attacks on Free Software (essays by Richard Stallman, Eben Moglen and others regarding SCO and GNU/Linux)
  • Re: Proposal: Linrmsux (complete thread) (Craig Burley, Usenet gnu.misc.discuss, 30 May 1996)
  • "GNU/Linux" vs. "Linux" (Slashdot, 9 April 1999)
  • Transcript of Stallman's NYU speech (speech at New York University, 29 May 2001)
  • Why "Free Software" Is Better Than "Open Source" (Richard Stallman)
  • A mail from Richard Stallman, refuting many points from Alan Cox
  • A transcript of an explanation of Linux and "GNU/", excerpted from a speech by Richard Stallman

Press

  • What's in a name? (Richard Stallman, ZDNet, 12 October 2000)
  • The Power of GNU (PCLinuxOnline, 26 October 2002)
  • Why I Don't Use "Linux" (Timothy R. Butler, Open for Business, 25 August 2003)
  • Who wrote Linux? (Josh Mehlman, ZDNet Australia, 7 July 2004)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy"