OT: FAQ and GNU
ralph at inputplus.co.uk
Thu Oct 12 17:45:22 CEST 2017
> > You snipped the bit where I said "Linux" has two meanings in the
> > English language depending on context.
> In the previous message you said “"Linux" can be the kernel or a
"Linux" can be the kernel or a distro. Context makes this clear in
the majority of cases. Appending `kernel' or `distribution' in the
odd remaining case is sufficient.
> But this is outright incorrect (Linux is not a distribution).
You cut the important part.
> Thus I elided this part according to my practice of omitting
> irrelevant text in a reply to keep the messages to a readable size.
Or that contradicts your argument.
> The name “Linux” was invented for the kernel for which Linus Torvalds
> is known. Later, lazy people incorrecting began using the same word to
> refer to basically any software bundle that include this kernel.
No, not lazy people. English-speaking people. The language is
constantly evolving, taking on foreign words, allowing its rules to
adjust over time, assimilating... That's why it's on course to be the
world's language, if it's not already.
The bulk of people use "Linux" to mean both terms, in casual and formal
speech and writing. You may as well try and insist we use "United
States of America" all the time instead of "America"; context alone
typically implies the intended meaning.
> > Given your admirable, though misplaced, zeal, I doubt there's a
> > considered argument to be had here.
I should take my own advice!
> Do not eat animals; respect them as you respect people.
`Duck to go' is an unfortunate choice. :-)
More information about the Gnupg-users