[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: confusion in left frame of the website
From: |
Robert Millan |
Subject: |
Re: confusion in left frame of the website |
Date: |
Sat, 23 Aug 2003 18:28:20 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 06:28:36PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 06:02:38PM +0000, Robert Millan wrote:
> >
> > I have already some ideas for the "GNU/Hurd" field. It could explain the
> > following points. I think it's clear enough:
> >
> > - The latest release of the GNU system is 0.2. It is obsolete, unusable,
> > ABI incompatible, etc. We don't even provide a link to it.
> > - What you want is a modern distribution of GNU/Hurd. Currently the only
> > available distribution is Debian GNU/Hurd (efforts are there on Gentoo
> > and others)
> >
> > There's no room for confusion if you explain everything without ambiguity.
>
> This is basically what the installation page says. If a user wants to
> install the GNU Hurd, on which link is he going to click?
There's no link for installing the Hurd. For GNU Mach we have some notes [1]
about build dependencies, cross-compiling, etc. But for the Hurd there are
no such notes. What you will find in their place are notes for installing
a Debian GNU/Hurd distribution.
It is not common for a new user to have any interest on installing the Hurd
though. Person would want to install a usable GNU/Hurd system instead having
the information for installing GNU/Hurd under "the Hurd" gives the idea that
"GNU/Hurd" and "the Hurd" are the same thing.
[1] http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/gnumach-install.html
> Can there be
> another choice than the "Installation" link under "The Hurd"?
Well I find a new section for "GNU/Hurd" is missing. It can have things like
"Installation" and "History" [2], for example.
[2] http://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-history.html
> You base your suggestion on a mail on Debian GNU/Hurd. But it is very
> common for people to call the GNU/Hurd, "the Hurd", because that is what
> they are used from elsewhere. They say BSD even if they mean the whole
> distribution,
Actualy this is correct. *BSD are complete OSes [3]. In fact, we just came up
with a new nomenclature for referring to *BSD's kernels. "KFreeBSD" means
"kernel of FreeBSD", etc. Then we have "GNU/KFreeBSD", etc. For details see
http://bugs.debian.org/206663
[3] I use "OS" as in full system with userland.
> and they do the same for Linux. Some people even say "how can
> I install Linux 8.2" and they most certainly the distribution.
You know as well I do this is an old confusion the GNU project has been
deeply concerned with for almost a decade.
> So if they look for the Hurd, and mean the distribution, they will find it
> in the current web page. I am not sure where the problem is. Do you mean
> that the problem is that the current web page reinforces the lack of
> distinction between GNU Hurd and GNU/Hurd? I initially thought your concern
> was that a user wouldn't find the install docs.
That's it; I don't doubt that new users will be able to find what they want
in that page. What I put into question is that new users know what they are
actualy installing.
Correct me if i am wrong, but my impression is that most new GNU/Hurd users
think they're installing and using "the Hurd". Whereas this is true in some
way (just like they're installing and using "Coreutils"), it gives a wrong
idea: that "the Hurd" and "GNU/Hurd" are actualy the same thing.
--
Robert Millan
"[..] but the delight and pride of Aule is in the deed of making, and in the
thing made, and neither in possession nor in his own mastery; wherefore he
gives and hoards not, and is free from care, passing ever on to some new work."
-- J.R.R.T, Ainulindale (Silmarillion)