 |
 |
|
June 25, 2003Why I dislike RMSIf you know me at all, you know I don't care for RMS when he stands on his soapbox. Although I have only shared a beer with him once, even then he wouldn't get down off the soap box. But that is RMS. As a person he is pretty kewl. But I can't stand his attitude with GNU and Linux. Even when he is right. What I mean is that even when he is right he can come across as a dick. While reading an interview in which he discusses the SCO vs IBM lawsuit... he came out with a good ditty that pissed me off for some reason, and it really isn't a bad quote:
He's right. Linux is NOT essential to GNU anymore. Yet he blows off that the two were so closely intertwined that BOTH of their successes could be contributed to each other. His HURD kernel sucked so bad at the time no one wanted to work on it. Instead of attacking the hard parts first (the GNU kernel), they decided to make all the tools. For the longest time, they piggybacked on Linus' kernel like a parasite on a whale until they finally found another whale they could jump to. Not that GNU tools are parasitic at all. They are awesome. But you get the metaphor. Now don't get me wrong. Some days I think we don't give GNU enough credit. With gcc we couldn't COMPILE much on Linux (Yes there ARE other compilers, but RMS doesn't want you to think about that). But lets not forget what got GNU to where it is, and vice versa with Linux. And when discussing SCO don't blow off Linux like it's dead and that everyone should run to the HURD kernel. Gimme a break. Comments
"Linux itself is no longer essential" That is just a dumb, meaningless statement. Linux IS essential,... to the whole free software, in the real world, movement. GNU tools were used by me in 1985 compiling the crappy stuff I wrote back then. Well before Linux existed. They were, and still are essential to any free software movement, imo, but they aren't the only essential part. If I ask my parents to name a free operating system, they'll name Linux (of course they may be remebering their coaching). The BSD's are awesome technology and better than Linux at some things, but to gain any kind of "marketshare", the free software movement needs Linux to head it. My analogy is calling the free software movement a car, Linux is the engine, and GNU tools are the altenator, brakes, starter, etc. When people name this thing, they should call it "the free software movement", but they'll call it by the engine's name. Could the car operate without the starter, etc. No. But should we call the car by the name of the starter? Linux is what people recognize and if Linux/GNU is going to gain any ground against the evil empire, it needs to be one easy name to call it by,... Linux Posted by: raskal at June 25, 2003 03:38 PM |
 
My 5 Favorite Books
Writing Secure Code
Secure Programming Cookbook Security Engineering Secure Coding Principles & Practice Inside the Security Mind
My 5 Favorite Papers
Smashing the Stack
Penetration Studies Covert Channel Analysis of Trusted Systems DoD Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria NSA Security Recommendation Guides
Archives
December 2005
November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 |
|
