From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_NXDOMAIN, DMARC_MISSING,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from mailnews.kub.nl (mailnews.kub.nl [137.56.0.220]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17362AC381 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 14:05:30 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mail.sub.devrieze.net (gt0416.kub.nl [137.56.97.162]) by mailnews.kub.nl (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g8PJ5KvA024889 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 21:05:20 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from pavlvs1.local.devrieze.net (pavlvs1.local.devrieze.net [192.168.1.1]) by mail.sub.devrieze.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DC46768 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 21:05:19 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Paul de Vrieze To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proper Gentoo Name (was License criteria for Gentoo) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 21:05:18 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200209252105.18798.pauldv@cs.kun.nl> Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: 1527d6fc-692b-4dab-8fcf-5123d0e6719b X-Archives-Hash: 9ed9ac508c846a10d406d872a05b5dc9 On Wednesday 25 September 2002 16:01, wes chow wrote: > That should be "QED" if and only if the naming scheme the car industry = has > chosen is indeed the correct thing to do. > > The car analogy isn't so useful becuase it's important that we do what'= s > right, not that we do what already has a precedent. Gentoo is Portage. > Portage needs GNU utilities like a fish needs a bicycle. > No, gentoo is as much portage as Redhat is rpm. If that were the case SUS= E and=20 Redhat would be the same, as they are both rpm based. I don't mean that portage isn't important to the gentoo distribution, as = it=20 is. It doesn't define the distribution though. If someone uses the gentoo= =20 stage three to start his system, and then unmerges portage anduninstalls = its=20 leftovers that person would still be running gentoo. If he afterwards dec= ides=20 to compile X, kde, etc. he is still running gentoo. He could even decide = to=20 write a portage clone that uses a different database (like the now abando= ned=20 portage2), but still uses the ebuilds, he would most certainly be running= =20 gentoo. The thing is, everything is replaceable. Gentoo is the general=20 architecture and thought of the system. Of course gentoo for now is depen= dant=20 on the gnu toolchain. This doesn't mean though that replacements couldn't= be=20 made and used. If gentoo oneday decided to stop using gcc and binutils=20 (replace them with e.g. icc), and ported the bsd utilities to linux, woul= d=20 the system behave differently. No, not at all (maybe in speed). Would it = so=20 be a different distribution. No. Well, if we didn't allow the choice, it=20 would be, but that is because gentoo is about choice now and choicelesnes= s is=20 not "the gentoo way"(TM). Not that I care much wether or not the name of the distribution is Gentoo= =20 GNU/Linux or Gentoo Linux. I think the use of the name linux might be use= ful=20 to the future as we might get a whole gentoo family of distributions as w= e=20 now allready have various ports to different architectures. I do see a Ge= ntoo=20 Hurd happening sometime, in which case a name with linux in it is useful. One thing still. A kernel is a fundamentally different thing than a toolc= hain=20 as the gnu toolchain. Unless one implements differnent virtual machines o= n=20 one real computer (even then there must be some kernel logic centrally), = a=20 computer can only run one kernel at a time. Why can only one real kernel = run=20 at one time. Basically because a computer has limited resources. It has o= nly=20 one mouse that I'm currently moving, and one keyboard that I'm currently=20 typing. These actions need to be handled by the software for the computer= to=20 be able to for example move the screen pointer as a result of my mouse=20 movement. The problem is that we don't want to have a fight over which=20 program has control over my mouse. For that we need some "police" agent t= hat=20 decides who has control. Well the kernel is that police agent. The kernel= =20 "polices" a variety of devices including: the processor(s), the memory, t= he=20 keyboard, the display, the mouse, the soundcard, the interrupt controller= =2E It=20 is even so that the ix86 where x>3 has provisions so that a kernel can te= ll=20 the processor what priviledge a process has, and which I/O ports and memo= ry=20 ranges it can access. Those provisions effectively lock unpriviledged=20 processes from using I/O. If a process wants to use I/O (such as X) it ne= eds=20 to ask the kernel for access to it. The kernel will only give access to a= =20 process when no other process is using the particular device. Of course people have also started to confuse the linux distribution with= the=20 linux kernel. Gentoo is a linux distribution, and a linux distribution al= so=20 depends on other things than the kernel. It very much depends on the=20 availability of a lot of parts such as the gnu toolchain, glibc, but also= on=20 X to be available. Paul --=20 Paul de Vrieze Junior Researcher Mail: pauldv@cs.kun.nl Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net