arch gnu/linux

osc~ · 2007-07-06 21:37:44

people
i really believe the distribution should use gnu in the name. this is an important matter.
part of the reason i am thinking of switching from slackware is this reason. (there are others of course)
also since the license is GPL that is more of a reason to add gnu.
it is important that the name carries in it the freedom that the fsf and gnu represent.
cheers.

thayer · 2007-07-06 21:55:41

I can already see where this thread will go...

I won't disagree that GNU is an important part of Linux, and I think it's important for any real Linux user to understand exactly what it is that "makes" Linux. I also often use the term GNU/Linux when speaking about Linux in general.

However, that being said, I that believe any company/organization/group has the right to call their product whatever they want. Arch Linux is the brand name of the distribution. That'd be like asking Nike to change the name of their shoes to "Nike Shoe", because it IS a shoe. That's probably not the best analogy, but I think you get the point.

osc~ · 2007-07-06 22:06:41

Arch Linux is the brand name of the distribution.

well you see arch linux as a brand while i see it as an operating system for a community and the well being of all.
i really dont understand why there is so much resistance to this topic by so many people. after all linux is the kernel which with gnu form the operating system. we cannot accept things just because they are easier or more pragmatic especially in these days. it is important for people to know the difference between things. i.e. many people refer to linux as "an" operating system just as they would say windows. but the fact is linux is not just one thing - there is debian, slackware, ututo, blag, arch. so it would be nice to explain what is an operating system in order for people to understand. and hopefully become users of technology rather than consumers.

cheers.

thayer · 2007-07-06 22:12:57

Unfortunately, I don't think I am the only that see Arch Linux as the brand. I believe the primary developers and coordinators of this project see things that way too. I don't know that there is so much resistance to this subject, I think for many folks it's a moot point. It's like trying to correct someone when they say kleenex instead of tissue. It's their personal preference. I know there are a few odd folks out there who absolutely refuse to use the term GNU/Linux, but I do think they are a fringe crowd.

Last edited by thayer.w (2007-07-06 22:13:39)

tomk · 2007-07-06 22:15:58

osc~, if you feel strongly about it, submit a formal request via the bugtracker. Once it's there, it's on record, and it will be evaluated.

osc~ · 2007-07-06 22:40:21

thanks for the hint, i will do that.
but i really would like to know what the members of this community think.
i dont really intend on forcing anyone to change their mind. i would just like to make them aware of the issue.

cheers.

PS
is this the link to the bug tracker?
http://bugs.archlinux.org/

tomk · 2007-07-06 23:06:19

Yes, that's it.

briancurtin · 2007-07-06 23:26:02

osc~ wrote:

thanks for the hint, i will do that.
but i really would like to know what the members of this community think.

i could not care less about whether or not GNU was included in the name.
it's just a name to me. hell, i dont even call it "arch linux" half the time, i just call it "arch". i dont feel im doing the linux kernel a disservice by only calling it "arch"

Zaffe · 2007-07-07 00:01:21

I get that it could be a deal.. its has been for a long time.. but its just that just "Linux" its shorter and catchy, i would be in favor of changing the logo of the page to "archlinux - a simple, lightweight GNU/Linux distribution" if that help in something, but not more.

Borosai · 2007-07-07 02:09:45

Zaffe wrote:

I get that it could be a deal.. its has been for a long time.. but its just that just "Linux" its shorter and catchy, i would be in favor of changing the logo of the page to "archlinux - a simple, lightweight GNU/Linux distribution" if that help in something, but not more.

This is probably the best way to go about it. The name is fine... Arch GNU/Linux isn't good branding... it just isn't. However, using GNU/Linux in the description is more practical, and might please the idealists out there.

pjeremy · 2007-07-07 03:04:55

You know you're annoying when ...
* you(r first post is to) bitch about the logo
* you(r second post is to) bitch about not using GNU/Linux in the name.
The only reason for the GNU/Linux crusade by RMS et al. is that Hurd has never been anything and will never amount to anything.
Hurd is worse than Duke Nukem Forever...
Why isn't your kind advocating GNU/X/Apache/KDE/etc/Linux ?
It's not an important matter, it's a laughable, perhaps even pitiful, matter.
You'll be a lot happier with Debian GNU/Linux.

kano · 2007-07-07 03:07:56

For one, I think Arch GNU/Linux just sounds weird.
Personally though, I see archlinux as the brand name, not just arch.

jb · 2007-07-07 04:19:34

I side with the current Arch naming scheme.

Aside: I just noticed Gentoo's logo in the top-left says "Gentoo Linux tm"; I guess they see it as a product name, too.

xterminus · 2007-07-07 04:29:48

I think that there are good reasons to refer to GNU/Linux instead of "Linux" when referring to distributions and not the kernel itself. But renaming "Archlinux to ArchGnuLinux" (or some variant) is probably not much of an option.

In *any* distribution this would be a pretty contentious issue due to the wide variety of opinions regarding the FSF, the GPL, RMS, and copyleft. My guess is that most archers are attracted to this distribution because of it's technical excellence and simplicty rather than for reasons of "freedom" or software purity.

kth5 · 2007-07-07 04:52:27

There's been tons of discussions about this topic on the net over the past decade or more. We all agree that tools the Free Software Foundation with its subproject GNU released are a vital part of the system BUT if you look closer you'll see that most packages do not come from, are endorsed by or licensed in any sort from the GNU project at all. They're merely released under a license that has been formulated by the FSF called GPL. 90% if not more packages are not GNU, roughly less than 70% are GPL even. If we consider to call Arch differently, we should call it something like: "Arch GNU,BSD,Gnome,Kde,<all other groups> Linux". Does that make sense? No! Then again, I do feel the stuff from GNU is a great thing to have but it's still discriminating all other projects by only choosing one to put in the name, in my opinion.

In essence, it's all a matter of preference. Arch prefers to stay independent - which we are - and could easily have chosen the distro to base on BSD instead of GNU stuff. What's more, Linux in the name could also be left out. After all, not all projects may even have Linux in their name even though they use the kernel. We could choose not to do so as well if we really wanted.

Last edited by kth5 (2007-07-07 04:53:38)

pelle.k · 2007-07-07 05:13:52

It's not an important matter, it's a laughable, perhaps even pitiful, matter.
You'll be a lot happier with Debian GNU/Linux.

That wasn't very nice

Either way. I don't like when th FSF try to force it's name on to everything linux. the kernel is called "linux". People would go bonkers if someone named a distro "kde linux" or "linux gnome". You don't mix trademarks unless both parties are fine with it. From what i can remember, linus isn't too fond of FSF and their extremist attitudes.

I remember a while ago when some dude ported a few GPL (mostly linux) appz to haiku (an alpha version), and released it as "Pingwinek GNU/Haiku". That had a less than pleasant response from the haiku user and developer community. I would be pissed too.

mucknert · 2007-07-07 07:29:42

It is acutually very easy: refer to GNU/Linux when you want to talk about the System in general. Every Distribution _usually_ ships a GNU/Linux-System. But the Name of the Distribution should be untouched by that. In other words: Arch Linux stays Arch Linux but should say about itself (in the About or wherever), that it is a Distribution of GNU/Linux. I think, that the Shoe-Analogy describes that very well.

Of course it is important to aknowledge what GNU did for Linux but this should not be taken too far.

retsaw · 2007-07-07 08:49:56

The main problem I have with the term GUN/Linux is that GNU is a damn awful name. The FSF should have tried harder to come up with a decent name for their software, but I suppose they didn't think it was that important at the time. Anyway that's just my opinion.

I think this topic would have been better as a poll.

osc~ · 2007-07-07 14:22:47

exactly
i really just say slackware, gentoo, debian, arch - so it is really not about changing the name from arch linux to arch gnu/linux. My point was merely about stating the
"a simple, lightweight linux distribution."

maybe that should be reconsidered.

i know people get passionate about this things but i beleive dialog and communication are a healthy exercise to practise.
i know RMS is a pain most of the times but probably so is Torvalds, but their personalities should not discredit their work.

cheers

dtw · 2007-07-07 14:31:54

Yeah, I'm with kth5. I think using the term/label gnu in any of our "publicity" would be a misnomer. Arch isn't hung up on the whole free software thing and we support closed source applications (although some don't like that). To use the term gnu would, in some ways, imply a standard that we don't actually follow.

In short, I think using the GNU term would actually be somewhat misleading.

shining · 2007-07-07 14:34:04

osc~ wrote:

exactly
i really just say slackware, gentoo, debian, arch - so it is really not about changing the name from arch linux to arch gnu/linux. My point was merely about stating the
"a simple, lightweight linux distribution."
maybe that should be reconsidered.

Ah ok, that's what I was wondering. I didn't really like the idea of changing the distro name,
but changing things like this description from linux to GNU/Linux would be fair enough I guess.

dtw · 2007-07-07 15:03:54

dtw wrote:

To use the term gnu would, in some ways, imply a standard that we don't actually follow.

s/standard/philosophy - i think that is more what I meant.

osc~ · 2007-07-07 18:50:50

Arch isn't hung up on the whole free software thing and we support closed source applications (although some don't like that).

what does that mean. if it means that you use closed source apps that is ok i guess, you are 100% free to do what you wish. but if you develop closed source apps or programs, to be honest, that scares me a little - it is a turn-off.

osc~ · 2007-07-07 18:54:49

pjeremy wrote:

You know you're annoying when ...
* you(r first post is to) bitch about the logo
* you(r second post is to) bitch about not using GNU/Linux in the name.
The only reason for the GNU/Linux crusade by RMS et al. is that Hurd has never been anything and will never amount to anything.
Hurd is worse than Duke Nukem Forever...
Why isn't your kind advocating GNU/X/Apache/KDE/etc/Linux ?
It's not an important matter, it's a laughable, perhaps even pitiful, matter.
You'll be a lot happier with Debian GNU/Linux.

i really think you should take it easy and relax a little. no need to get agressive. there is nothing wrong with questioning things as long as we maintain some objectivity. dont you think? so i hope i dont annoy you anymore; as for the "bitching", well i dont know what to say about that.

Mikko777 · 2007-07-07 19:31:27

osc~ wrote:

pjeremy wrote:
You know you're annoying when ...
* you(r first post is to) bitch about the logo
* you(r second post is to) bitch about not using GNU/Linux in the name.
The only reason for the GNU/Linux crusade by RMS et al. is that Hurd has never been anything and will never amount to anything.
Hurd is worse than Duke Nukem Forever...
Why isn't your kind advocating GNU/X/Apache/KDE/etc/Linux ?
It's not an important matter, it's a laughable, perhaps even pitiful, matter.
You'll be a lot happier with Debian GNU/Linux.
i really think you should take it easy and relax a little. no need to get agressive. there is nothing wrong with questioning things as long as we maintain some objectivity. dont you think? so i hope i dont annoy you anymore; as for the "bitching", well i dont know what to say about that.

Well, even in danger of sounding childish I have to side with pjeremy on this one.

And osc theres nothing wrong in being nerdy but being unproductive nerd makes you seem more like a troll
(And trolls are bad / evil)

Arch Linux

#1 2007-07-06 21:37:44

arch gnu/linux

#2 2007-07-06 21:55:41

Re: arch gnu/linux

#3 2007-07-06 22:06:41

Re: arch gnu/linux

#4 2007-07-06 22:12:57

Re: arch gnu/linux

#5 2007-07-06 22:15:58

Re: arch gnu/linux

#6 2007-07-06 22:40:21

Re: arch gnu/linux

#7 2007-07-06 23:06:19

Re: arch gnu/linux

#8 2007-07-06 23:26:02

Re: arch gnu/linux

#9 2007-07-07 00:01:21

Re: arch gnu/linux

#10 2007-07-07 02:09:45

Re: arch gnu/linux

#11 2007-07-07 03:04:55

Re: arch gnu/linux

#12 2007-07-07 03:07:56

Re: arch gnu/linux

#13 2007-07-07 04:19:34

Re: arch gnu/linux

#14 2007-07-07 04:29:48

Re: arch gnu/linux

#15 2007-07-07 04:52:27

Re: arch gnu/linux

#16 2007-07-07 05:13:52

Re: arch gnu/linux

#17 2007-07-07 07:29:42

Re: arch gnu/linux

#18 2007-07-07 08:49:56

Re: arch gnu/linux

#19 2007-07-07 14:22:47

Re: arch gnu/linux

#20 2007-07-07 14:31:54

Re: arch gnu/linux

#21 2007-07-07 14:34:04

Re: arch gnu/linux

#22 2007-07-07 15:03:54

Re: arch gnu/linux

#23 2007-07-07 18:50:50

Re: arch gnu/linux

#24 2007-07-07 18:54:49

Re: arch gnu/linux

#25 2007-07-07 19:31:27

Re: arch gnu/linux

Board footer