That is the point. Stallman is one of the most influential guys in this movement. He is one of the main coders - And we all know that gcc is his work. Now, if it were scc (stallman C compiler), it would still stick. The thing is, his name will be inscribed in any and all of the FSF utilities, as well as the HURD kernel. NOT in any currently available OS. And, as you say - ESR got famous thanks to the Cathedral and the Bazaar. RMS got famous thanks to the GPL - one of the finest works we live with.
Well... If we want to give credit where credit is due to great contributions, maybe I should state I'm working on a Babbage/Eniac/Univac/Multics/Unix/Linux machine, and that most PC users use a Babbage/Eniac/Univac/Multics/Unix/CP\/M/DOS/Window s machine? (I don't know the exact order and derivation of systems, but this can get ridiculous...)
> Should everything compiled with >GCC and debugged with GDB be referred to with the >'GNU/' prefix? Maybe everything anyone has ever >viewed on paper should be referred to with a >'Gutenberg/' prefix.
Well... So printed Linux manuals could be abreviated as "GNUtemberg/"? Sounds neat;)
n lines of gcc is greater than n lines of utils?
on
Feature:Free Linux
·
· Score: 1
One thing is to write a compiler... Another thing (and a very different one) is to write a half-decent compiler. An almost impossible task is to write an EXCELLENT compiler.
The 1.3 Workbench *WAS* crappy (according to modern standards), went to Guru meditations all the time, and all that shit. 2.04 was *MUCH* more stable (it was really rare to see a Guru with it), and 3.1 was... Simply great. Well, and given that so many people (like me) zKicked their 1.3 A500s into thinking they had a 3.1 ROM (isn't that great?), we had zero problems with it.
Now, for old machines you still had the incredible GOMF (Get Outta My Face), that took care of most guru meditations...
Slashdot Mirror
That is the point. Stallman is one of the most influential guys in this movement. He is one of the main coders - And we all know that gcc is his work. Now, if it were scc (stallman C compiler), it would still stick. The thing is, his name will be inscribed in any and all of the FSF utilities, as well as the HURD kernel. NOT in any currently available OS. And, as you say - ESR got famous thanks to the Cathedral and the Bazaar. RMS got famous thanks to the GPL - one of the finest works we live with.
Well... If we want to give credit where credit is due to great contributions, maybe I should state I'm working on a Babbage/Eniac/Univac/Multics/Unix/Linux machine, and that most PC users use a Babbage/Eniac/Univac/Multics/Unix/CP\/M/DOS/Window s machine? (I don't know the exact order and derivation of systems, but this can get ridiculous...)
Try with LiGNUx... Well, it's a bit harder to pronounce than it is to spell...
> Should everything compiled with
;)
>GCC and debugged with GDB be referred to with the
>'GNU/' prefix? Maybe everything anyone has ever
>viewed on paper should be referred to with a
>'Gutenberg/' prefix.
Well... So printed Linux manuals could be abreviated as "GNUtemberg/"? Sounds neat
One thing is to write a compiler... Another thing (and a very different one) is to write a half-decent compiler. An almost impossible task is to write an EXCELLENT compiler.
The 1.3 Workbench *WAS* crappy (according to modern standards), went to Guru meditations all the time, and all that shit. 2.04 was *MUCH* more stable (it was really rare to see a Guru with it), and 3.1 was... Simply great. Well, and given that so many people (like me) zKicked their 1.3 A500s into thinking they had a 3.1 ROM (isn't that great?), we had zero problems with it.
Now, for old machines you still had the incredible GOMF (Get Outta My Face), that took care of most guru meditations...
I read PERL BY EXAMPLE, by (I think) Sam Medinets. You can find it online at the Macmillan Personal Bookshelf, at http://www.mcp.com/personal.
Take a look at it, it's a great book.