Mario Castelán Castro marioxcc.MT at yandex.com
Tue Oct 10 17:46:59 CEST 2017

On 10/10/17 04:45, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> That to me means I would support leaving it as is. I don't feel strongly
> on writing it one way or another, but I do dislike the pressure some
> people exert on others pushing their view. If however you are
> consistently writing "Microsoft Windows®" everywhere in the FAQ, I'd
> find it natural to write "GNU/Linux" as well.

This is a fallacy. Windows *is* Microsoft Windows, the only thing called
“Windows” (as a proper noun) in informatics.

Not so with “GNU/Linux”. GNU/Linux is not Linux. Linux is a kernel.
GNU/Linux is the combination of this kernel with software from the GNU

The word “operating system” is too vague to have a reasonable discussion
of exactly what set of programs are part of an operating system. In any
case, it is clear that Linux is a kernel, not an operating system[1].

Also, the argument that GNU PG can be used on Linux without GNU is
invalid, for it can also be used without Linux. Several BSD variants
include GNU PG.

[1] I challenge anybody who replies with “operating system”=“kernel” to
explain how this viewpoint is compatible with the practice of calling
FreeBSD, Windows, OS X (as a whole) and so on an “operating system” and
not a “kernel”.

Do not eat animals; respect them as you respect people.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20171010/075b314d/attachment-0001.sig>

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list