Still repeating that old hash when the evidence contradicts? Remember, "Linux" was his working name. It was to be publically known as "Freax" since he thought "Linux" was too egotistical, but a friend of his used "Linux" when setting the space for the first posting to the net.
You're actually trying to sell the BS that Torvalds had no choice but name the code after himself?!? Oh, puh-lease. Hilarious. Talk about ridiculous lies.
First, Torvalds couldn't have consulted UNIX sources because he didn't have the code. He did have as an example how MINIX was built. Admittedly. No conspiracy for you and Brown, no theft, no lack of attribution since his first message stated the Minix heritage
Another lie. Read what Tanenbaum says...
"Linus didn't sit down in a vacuum and suddenly type in the Linux source code. He had my book [Operating Systems: Design and Implementation"], was running Minix and undoubtedly knew the history (since it is in my book)."
Now read the
Wiki page on MINIX:
Minix was written by Andrew Tanenbaum from Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands as an appendix or example in the book "Operating Systems: Design and Implementation", ISBN 0-13-637331-3. An abridged 12000 lines of source code of the kernel, memory manager, and file system is printed in the book; it is mostly written in C.
So, you see, you've been caught in a lie. Torvalds had the book and, thus, he had 12000 lines of MINIX source code. Not remarkably, his kernel incorporates concepts from this source code, such as the filesystem, source tree, etc.
Yes, he wrote it all by himself. No one has ever called into question whether he designed the behavior and file structures because it is admittedly from MINIX. You are either arguing a point of contention that doesn't exist or you are claiming code theft.
Great, we're making progress: You finally admit that Torvalds isn't the inventor of Linux. And it only took you several dozen posts to admit it. Congratulations.
Couldn't write. As in not capable of coming up with the code to punch into the editor by himself. The only alternative i can see is stolen code.
He couldn't have written his kernel without getting help; that is, consulting other implementations, such as MINIX.
No, he admitted that his model was MINIX, but all the code is his own, confirmed by Tanenbaum and now Brown's own researcher!
Fine, so he's merely a MINIX parasite.
If you're the programmer you state you are, you know "Borrowed" in programming means taking it from one place and putting it in another place, and can be copyright infringement. As above, it is now proven that the code was 100% his.
I've been very clear about saying that he wrote the code. See #8. Invent another strawman.
Weaseling won't work. You claimed the code was copied and supported Brown's claim of the same.
WTF about #8 don't you understand?!?
"I never said that Torvalds physically copied MINIX code. But he most certainly took the ideas directly from MINIX and incorporated them into his code. He didn't invent the ideas. He stood on the shoulders of giants, and then had the audacity to name Linux after himself."
You let your love for Microsoft and hatred of Linux suck you into believing Brown's hack job.
This has nothing to do with Microsoft. Stop changing the subject.
Now if you're saying only that it was stolen in the sense that Torvalds learned how OSs work and learned how programming works, then you can make the same claim for almost every piece of software ever written, but I don't see you going after Microsoft of course.
Again, stay on topic. The reason this is an issue is that you clowns basically canonized Torvalds as some kind of can-do-no-wrong saint, who "invented" Linux from his college dorm. We now know this isn't true. Torvalds consulted the MINIX book and had a significant amount of kernel source code at his disposal.
You're actually trying to sell the BS that Torvalds had no choice but name the code after himself?!? You know nothing of social dynamics. Once the name was started by his friend, and everybody hated his name, Linux stuck.
Not remarkably, his kernel incorporates concepts from this source code, such as the filesystem, source tree, etc.
Remarkably, Linux is so vastly different in internal structure from MINIX that Tanenbaum was its first critic. Yeah, he must have copied everything. It's like sitting down with Mercedes blueprints and coming out with a Lexus.
You finally admit that Torvalds isn't the inventor of Linux.
And Ken Thompson wasn't the inventor of UNIX because MULTICS already exsisted. BS. I guess Thompson was a MULTICS parasite. And I guess you'll never say Bill Gates was a parasite of almost everyone.
I've been very clear about saying that he wrote the code. See #8. Invent another strawman.
Yes, you were very clear and toned down your claims of theft AFTER you were called on it.
Torvalds consulted the MINIX book and had a significant amount of kernel source code at his disposal.
It's funny, you portray Tanenbaum as the poor man whose original work was stolen for Linux, but you don't criticize Tanenbaum for the fact that his OS was just a copy of UNIX.
Along your lines of thinking, NOBODY every invented any OS, they all just stole from the previous. But you won't criticize anyone but Linus for their OS having some sort of ancestry, even those who exactly copied code.