Difference between revisions of "Talk:GNU/Linux"
(→Who did what: Can't emphasize it enough . . .) |
Davidklein (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
We should give credit where credit is due. Our web site runs on free software like Apache and GNU, thanks to RMS!! --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 11:56, 10 July 2007 (EDT) | We should give credit where credit is due. Our web site runs on free software like Apache and GNU, thanks to RMS!! --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 11:56, 10 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Changes== | ||
| + | |||
| + | I made some small changes as I thought that the article was a little confusing to somebody with no experience of Linux. I'll continue to edit the remainder of the article if nobody has any objections. --[[User:davidklein|davidklein]] 14:45, 8 November 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 19:46, November 8, 2007
Notes on the differences between Ubuntu Christian and Ubuntu Satanic versions: The Christian version of Ubuntu actually modifies the base software that comes with the distribution, adding software such as Gnomesword and Dansguardian with the distro; i.e. it's a distribution. Ubuntu Satanic on the other hand, is just Ubuntu/Kubuntu with a "satanic" theme; i.e. colors, wallpaper and some graphics. If the user S.E. either deleted or selecting another theme, you would be back to the basic Kubuntu distribution.
I can find no references that Ubuntu Satanic Edition is either a parody or in response to the Christian edition. The author of the article on DesktopLinux.com[1] makes a comment that the theme is a response to the Christian edition, but that appears to be an assumption on his part, as I can find nothing from the authors on the Satanic version site that indicates that it is. --Todd 10:15 March 21 2007 EDT
- I agree, describing the Satanic Edition as a parody is a point of view. Clearly the people behind it intend to serve a user base they think exists.
I wasn't sure what this statement meant: "The theme is an example, such as Ubuntu Christian Edition [3], of GPL licensed software which may be modified and re-released." So I rewrote what I thought it was meant to mean. If I was wrong, feel free to fix it.--All Fish Welcome 17:47, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
Who did what
The article, like most in the trade press, gives far too much credit to Linus Torvalds and downplays the work of Richard Stallman inexcusably.
I took out this sentence, because it is incorrect:
- "It was started in 1991 as a university project by Finnish student Linus Torvalds as a replacement for the Minix operating system."
In fact, "Linux" (i.e., the GNU/Linux operating system, began nearly a decade before Torvalds got started:
- The GNU Project was launched in 1984 to develop a complete Unix-like operating system which is free software: the GNU system. [1]
We should give credit where credit is due. Our web site runs on free software like Apache and GNU, thanks to RMS!! --Ed Poor Talk 11:56, 10 July 2007 (EDT)
Changes
I made some small changes as I thought that the article was a little confusing to somebody with no experience of Linux. I'll continue to edit the remainder of the article if nobody has any objections. --davidklein 14:45, 8 November 2007 (EDT)