[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: gnu vs. xemacs

From: Matthew Flaschen
Subject: Re: gnu vs. xemacs
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 13:57:34 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20061115)

Tim X wrote:
> You don't think your being a bit pedantic do you? After all, Linux is
> what GNU/Linux is commonly called. You also have lots of other
> references out there which don't include the "GNU" part, such as The
> Linux Journal, the Linux Gazette, Linux Weekly news,
>,, etc etc.

> At least if your going to take the time to post a response, maybe add
> something for the OP in addition to correcting his colloquial use of
> Linux rather than the technically correct one.

I don't think he's being pedantic, and the fact that the error is common
does not mean it's insignificant.  It's not only technically correct,
it's ethically correct.

As for the OP, I can't help since I've never used XEmacs.

Matt Flaschen

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]