Re: environ and -D_GNU_SOURCE

[Vicki Riggins <vicki at riggins dot com>]

Please remove riggins@bellatlantic.net and/or vicki@riggins.com from list.

Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:

> >>>>> On Thu, 18 May 2000 18:29:46 +0200, Thorsten Kukuk <kukuk@suse.de> said:
>
>     >> Take Linux, sysvinit, bash, glibc, gcc, gdb, emacs, the gnu binutils,
>     Thorsten> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>     Thorsten> Linux is GPL, not GNU. sysvinit is GPL, not GNU, ...
>     Thorsten> I don't know of any GNU init programm.
>
> That 's what I said. Linux, sysvinit, and maybe XFree are the only
> non-GNU part required to set up a complete GNU system.
>
>     >> the gnu fileutils, the gnu netutils and you have a complete system made
>     Thorsten> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>     Thorsten> This is BSD, it isn't even under GPL. And no Linux distribution uses it.
>
> Sorry, I was meaning the sh-utils.
>
>     Thorsten> No. I only see how less programs installed on my computer are
>     Thorsten> really from a GNU project. I don't speak about GPL, I mean GNU software.
>
> Well. Let's take it differently.
> Let A be what you call a "Linux system".
> Let B be what the FSF decided their system to be, a complete free
> UNIX-like OS (with compiler, text editor, text processor, and the rest).
>
> A and B contain the same components, whether GPL or not, whether coming
> from GNU or from BSD doesn't matter.
>
> A is B with Linux for kernel. Therefore A is a Linux-based GNU system.
>
> It doesn't matter whether the GNU system is made entirely from the GNU projects
> or not. TeX is not a GNU project, but it's still part of the GNU
> System because RMS wanted his system to include TeX. Same thing for X, etc.
> All RMS wanted for his system is that each component be free,
> preferably but not mandatorily under the GNU GPL. (see gzip for
> example, which is not even under the GNU LGPL although it's called
> "GNU Zip")
>
> The GNU system and the GNU components (AKA "GNU Projects") are two
> different concepts.
>
> Why would the FSF reinvent the wheel after all. When then can have free
> components coming from other project with a free licence, and that
> those components meet their requirements of useability (under
> GNU/Linux, we use Bash instead of SH because it's better) , they
> include them in their system.
>
> Same thing for the Linux kernel. They needed a free kernel to obtain a
> complete system and so they decided Linux could be one of the system's
> components even if it was not a GNU Project. So was born the GNU/Linux
> system. At least they have decided to give special credit to the Linux
> kernel...
>
> Wolfgang