Posted on 03/31/2007 10:02:49 AM PDT by ShadowAce
See, I told you he would show up.
Yep. And it's a good thing -- think how much less energetic the Linux threads would be without him. (I've always enjoyed a little mayhem with my techno-chat...)
Lol!
Well someone needs to correct all the linux lies on here. The starter of this thread just the other day was trying to tell someone he had been "exclusively using Linux since 2003" when the fact is he runs Windows right on his own laptop. I just don't understand how you could make up such a lie about yourself like that, do you?
No, you're just a masochist. You've received a thorough beating the last couple of times you showed up, yet you keep showing up. That's a masochist.
Actually, I don't think you've gotten anything right in months, not since you finally admitted to making up lies that the US DoD was using software from Russian hackers, who you were of course defending.
You're the one who said Torvalds did a 180 back when, WRONG. You're the one who says Groklaw is untrustworthy, yet can't show a single false court filing or transcript. You're the one who had no idea how Feist fit into the SCO case. I think I'm doing pretty well on this subject, you're doing pretty badly.
Russian hackers
That's your fallback position when you're losing. We know you've lost when you go there.
Piss on the FSF....an operating system is named by it's creator, and the creator of Linux is Linus Torvalds, not Richard Stallman or any of his accolytes. Just because some GNU software is in the OS, that does't make it a GNU system. That's like saying "hey, Ford used 45 percent Autolite branded parts in that car, so it's a Ford-Autolite". Stallman first tried telling people that Linus basically just altered the HURD kernel, which was utter crap. The Linux kernel was written from the ground up, and was inspired by Andy Tannenbaum's Minix system. When he got called on that BS, he then claimed that because it had so much GNU software in it, that it had to be called GNU Linux. He's full of it, but that's no secret in the Open Source community. If he wants a GNU branded system, he can get his little cult at the FSF to actually finish HURD (which is still in alpha after, oh, 20 years of testing...it sucks). Then let his GNU OS compete against Linux in the marketplace...where I predict it'll get firmly thrashed.
Golden Eagle used the fact that the name "Linux" is derived from Torvalds' name to try to portray Torvalds as some kind of egomaniac, naming an OS after himself.
But this is actually not true. Torvalds' name for his OS was "Freax," but the guy who ran the FTP server and gave Torvalds some space to host Linux named the folder "Linux" and it stuck as the name of the OS. So in this case the creator didn't get to name his OS.
Don't bother. He'll stop reading at this point. He doesn't want to hear that Torvalds isn't a commie, he only wants to libel his name by association with communists (even though it was involuntary). To him Torvalds and Stallman are one in the same, and no fact could ever change that. Here's a quote about the disagreements over the GPL3 (practical Torvalds vs. ideological Stallman):
You're fooling no one, this soap opera is just another pathetic example of leftists attempting to trick the idiotic. ... The rest is just a charade to hide from the facts.He actually thinks they're in ideological lockstep and there is no real disagreement in this issue, and he will continue to believe so no matter what facts we throw at him. You're wasting your time.
But you are so right about Stallman. He's so religious about this that he refused to interview with Information Week to counterpoint a Torvalds interview in a GPL3 story. Why? Because Information Week says "Linux" and not "GNU Linux." Now THAT'S an ego.
I think Hurd has even been surpassed by Minix, another attempt at a highly-modular microkernel-based OS. Hurd is still in 0.2 alpha, while Minix is stable at 3.1.2, although it doesn't have loads of drivers or features.
Well said LOL.
More pathetic lies from antiRepublican, the facts show Torvalds is probably going to side with the whacko Stallman in the end just as I have indicated was happening all along.
Maybe he will. But it's Stallman that's moving towards Torvalds, not the other way around. But whatever he agrees with will NOT be the original version, which you falsely claimed he did a 180 on. We told you back then that he stated he MAY agree with a MODIFIED GPL3 in the future, which was correct.
You can falsely claim lie all you want, but the history firmly establishes that you are the one who consistently lies, and never admits.
Person A says "I am going to do X".
Person B says "If you do X, youre on your own! I want Y"
Person A decides not to do X but adress Y instead.
Person B says "Well with X out of the way I *might* be ok"
So to you this is person B going along with A or person B drawing a line forcing person A to change their posistion?
They're still anti-patent copyleftists, and none of this charade changes that. Too bad there will probably not be a fork, but they don't really disagee that much and are loving the limelight and playing this for all that it's worth.
The other says "I dont like or use software patents but I dont think a license should enforce that"
Thats a huge difference. Linus, no matter how much you try to tie him to RMS, is pragmatic and not political when it comes to software development models and licenses.
Linus Torvalds when asked about patents: “hire a hit man and whack the guy”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.