/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html-diff

<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
<!-- Parent-Version: (削除) 1.75 (削除ここまで) (追記) 1.98 -->
<!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html -->
<!--#set var="TAGS" value="gnulinux" -->
<!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" (追記ここまで) -->
<title>GNU/Linux FAQ
- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
<!--#include virtual="/gnu/po/gnu-linux-faq.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
(追記) <!--#include virtual="/gnu/gnu-breadcrumb.html" -->
<!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
<!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
<div class="article reduced-width"> (追記ここまで)
<h2>GNU/Linux (削除) FAQ by (削除ここまで) (追記) FAQ</h2>
<address class="byline">by (追記ここまで) Richard (削除) Stallman</h2> (削除ここまで) (追記) Stallman</address> (追記ここまで)
<div (削除) class="announcement">
 <blockquote><p>To learn more about this issue, you can also read
our page on <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">Linux and the GNU Project</a>, our
 page on <a href="/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html">Why GNU/Linux?</a> 
and our page on <a href="/gnu/gnu-users-never-heard-of-gnu.html">GNU
Users Who Have Never Heard of GNU</a>.</p></blockquote>
</div> (削除ここまで) (追記) class="introduction"> (追記ここまで)
<p>
When people see that we use and recommend the name GNU/Linux for a
system that many others call just (削除) “Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux,” (追記ここまで) they ask many questions.
Here are common questions, and our answers.</p>
(追記) </div>
<div class="toc">
<hr class="no-display" />
<h3 class="no-display">Table of Contents</h3> (追記ここまで)
<ul>
<li><a (削除) href="#why" id="TOCwhy">Why (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#why">Why (追記ここまで) do you call (削除) it (削除ここまで) (追記) the system we use (追記ここまで) GNU/Linux and not Linux?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#whycare" id="TOCwhycare">Why (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#whycare">Why (追記ここまで) is the name important?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#howerror" id="TOChowerror">How (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#what">What is the real relationship between GNU and Linux?</a></li>
<li><a href="#howerror">How (追記ここまで) did it come about that most
 people call the system “Linux”?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#always" id="TOCalways">Should (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#always">Should (追記ここまで) we always say
“GNU/Linux” instead of “Linux”?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#linuxalone" id="TOClinuxalone">Would (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#linuxalone">Would (追記ここまで) Linux have achieved
 the same success if there had been no GNU?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#divide" id="TOCdivide">Wouldn't (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#divide">Wouldn't (追記ここまで) it be better for the
 community if you did not divide people with this request?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#freespeech" id="TOCfreespeech">Doesn't (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#freespeech">Doesn't (追記ここまで) the GNU project
 support an individual's free speech rights to call the system by
 any name that individual chooses?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#everyoneknows" id="TOCeveryoneknows">Since (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#everyoneknows">Since (追記ここまで) everyone
 knows the role of GNU in developing the system, doesn't the
 “GNU/” in the name go without saying?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#everyoneknows2" id="TOCeveryoneknows2">Since (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#everyoneknows2">Since (追記ここまで) I know the role of
 GNU in this system, why does it matter what name I use?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#windows" id="TOCwindows">Isn't (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#windows">Isn't (追記ここまで) shortening
 “GNU/Linux” to “Linux” just like
 shortening “Microsoft Windows” to
 “Windows”?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#tools" id="TOCtools">Isn't (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#tools">Isn't (追記ここまで) GNU a collection of programming
 tools that were included in Linux?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#osvskernel" id="TOCosvskernel">What (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#osvskernel">What (追記ここまで) is the difference between an operating
 system and a kernel?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#house" id="TOChouse">The (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#house">The (追記ここまで) kernel of a system is like the foundation
 of a house. How can a house be almost complete when it doesn't have a
 foundation?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#brain" id="TOCbrain">Isn't (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#brain">Isn't (追記ここまで) the kernel the brain of the
 system?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#kernelmost" id="TOCkernelmost">Isn't (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#kernelmost">Isn't (追記ここまで) writing the kernel
 most of the work in an operating system?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#afterkernel" id="TOCafterkernel">We're (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#nokernel">An operating system requires a kernel.
 Since the GNU Project didn't develop a kernel, how can
 the system be GNU?</a></li>
<li><a href="#notinstallable">How can GNU be an
 operating system, if I can't get something called “GNU”
 and install it?</a></li>
<li><a href="#afterkernel">We're (追記ここまで) calling the whole
 system after the kernel, Linux. Isn't it normal to name an
 operating system after a kernel?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#long" id="TOClong">The (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#feel">Can another system have “the
 feel of Linux”?</a></li>
<li><a href="#long">The (追記ここまで) problem with
 “GNU/Linux” is that it is too long. How about
 recommending a shorter name?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#long2" id="TOClong2">The (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#long1">How about calling the system
 “GliNUx” (instead of “GNU/Linux”)?</a></li>
<li><a href="#long2">The (追記ここまで) problem with
 “GNU/Linux” is that it is too long. Why should
 I go to the trouble of saying “GNU/”?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#justgnu" id="TOCjustgnu">Since (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#long3">Unfortunately,
 “GNU/Linux” is five syllables. People won't use such a
 long term. Shouldn't you find a shorter one?</a></li>
<li><a href="#long4">Stallman doesn't ask us to call him
 “Richard Matthew Stallman” every the time.
 So why ask us to say “GNU/Linux” every time?</a></li>
<li><a href="#justgnu">Since (追記ここまで) Linux is a secondary
 contribution, would it be false to the facts to call the system
 simply “GNU”?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#trademarkfee" id="TOCtrademarkfee">I (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#trademarkfee">I (追記ここまで) would have to pay a
 fee if I use “Linux” in the name of a product, and
 that would also apply if I say (削除) “GNU/Linux”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/Linux.” (追記ここまで) Is it
 wrong if I use “GNU” without (削除) “Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux,” (追記ここまで) to
 save the fee?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#many" id="TOCmany">Many (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#many">Many (追記ここまで) other projects contributed to the
 system as it is today; it includes TeX, X11, Apache, Perl, and many
 more programs. Don't your arguments imply we have to give them
 credit too? (But that would lead to a name so long it is
 absurd.)</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#others" id="TOCothers">Many (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#systemd">systemd plays an important role in the GNU/Linux
 system as it is today; are we obligated to call it
 GNU/systemd/Linux?</a></li>
<li><a href="#others">Many (追記ここまで) other projects contributed to
 the system as it is today, but they don't insist on calling it
 XYZ/Linux. Why should we treat GNU specially?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#allsmall" id="TOCallsmall">GNU (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#allsmall">GNU (追記ここまで) is a small fraction of the system
 nowadays, so why should we mention it?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#manycompanies" id="TOCmanycompanies">Many (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#manycompanies">Many (追記ここまで) companies
 contributed to the system as it is today; doesn't that mean
 we ought to call it GNU/Red Hat/Novell/Linux?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#whyslash" id="TOCwhyslash">Why (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#whyslash">Why (追記ここまで) do you write
 “GNU/Linux” instead of “GNU
 Linux”?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#whyorder" id="TOCwhyorder">Why (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#linuxlibre">Does GNU have its own version of Linux,
 the kernel?</a></li>
<li><a href="#pronounce">How is the name “GNU/Linux”
pronounced?</a></li>
<li><a href="#whynoslash">Why do you write
 “GNU Emacs” rather than “GNU/Emacs”?</a></li>
<li><a href="#whyorder">Why (追記ここまで) “GNU/Linux”
rather than “Linux/GNU”?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#distronames" id="TOCdistronames">My (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#distronames0">My distro's developers call it
 “Foobar Linux,” but that doesn't say anything about
 what the system consists of. Why shouldn't they call it whatever
 they like?</a></li>
<li><a href="#distronames">My (追記ここまで) distro is called
 “Foobar Linux”; doesn't that show it's really
 Linux?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#distronames1" id="TOCdistronames1">My (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#distronames1">My (追記ここまで) distro's official
 name is “Foobar Linux”; isn't it wrong to call the
 distro anything but (削除) “Linux”?</a></li> (削除ここまで) (追記) “Foobar Linux”?</a></li> (追記ここまで)
<li><a (削除) href="#companies" id="TOCcompanies">Wouldn't (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#companies">Wouldn't (追記ここまで) it be more
 effective to ask companies such as Mandrake, Red Hat and IBM to
 call their distributions “GNU/Linux” rather than
 asking individuals?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#reserve" id="TOCreserve">Wouldn't (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#reserve">Wouldn't (追記ここまで) it be better to
 reserve the name “GNU/Linux” for distributions that
 are purely free software? After all, that is the ideal of
 GNU.</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#gnudist" id="TOCgnudist">Why (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#gnudist">Why (追記ここまで) not make a GNU distribution of
 Linux (sic) and call that GNU/Linux?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#linuxgnu" id="TOClinuxgnu">Why (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#linuxgnu">Why (追記ここまで) not just say “Linux
 is the GNU kernel” and release some existing version of
 GNU/Linux under the name “GNU”?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#condemn" id="TOCcondemn">Did (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#condemn">Did (追記ここまで) the GNU Project condemn and
 oppose use of Linux in the early days?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#wait" id="TOCwait">Why (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#wait">Why (追記ここまで) did you wait so long before
 asking people to use the name GNU/Linux?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#allgpled" id="TOCallgpled">Should (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#allgpled">Should (追記ここまで) the (削除) GNU/[name] (削除ここまで) (追記) GNU/<i>name</i> (追記ここまで) convention
 be applied to all programs that are GPL'ed?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#unix" id="TOCunix">Since (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#unix">Since (追記ここまで) much of GNU comes from Unix,
 shouldn't GNU give credit to Unix by using “Unix” in
 its name?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#bsd" id="TOCbsd">Should (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#bsd">Should (追記ここまで) we say “GNU/BSD”
too?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#othersys" id="TOCothersys">If (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#othersys">If (追記ここまで) I install the GNU tools on
 Windows, does that mean I am running a GNU/Windows system?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#justlinux" id="TOCjustlinux">Can't (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#justlinux">Can't (追記ここまで) Linux be used without
GNU?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#linuxsyswithoutgnu" id="TOClinuxsyswithoutgnu">Are (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#howmuch">How much of the GNU system
is needed for the system to be GNU/Linux?</a></li>
<li><a href="#linuxsyswithoutgnu">Are (追記ここまで) there complete Linux systems (追記) [sic] (追記ここまで) without GNU?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#helplinus" id="TOChelplinus">Why (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#usegnulinuxandandroid">Is it correct to say “using
 Linux” if it refers to using GNU/Linux and using Android?</a></li>
<li><a href="#helplinus">Why (追記ここまで) not call the system
 “Linux” anyway, and strengthen Linus Torvalds' role as
 posterboy for our community?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#claimlinux" id="TOCclaimlinux">Isn't (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#claimlinux">Isn't (追記ここまで) it wrong for us to label Linus
 Torvalds' work as GNU?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#linusagreed" id="TOClinusagreed">Does (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#linusagreed">Does (追記ここまで) Linus Torvalds
 agree that Linux is just the kernel?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#lost" id="TOClost">The (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#finishhurd">Why not finish
 the GNU Hurd kernel, release the GNU system as a whole,
 and forget the question of what to call GNU/Linux?</a></li>
<li><a href="#lost">The (追記ここまで) battle is already
 lost—society has made its decision and we can't change it,
 so why even think about it?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#whatgood" id="TOCwhatgood">Society (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#whatgood">Society (追記ここまで) has made its decision
 and we can't change it, so what good does it do if I say
 “GNU/Linux”?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#explain" id="TOCexplain">Wouldn't (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#explain">Wouldn't (追記ここまで) it be better to call
 the system “Linux” and teach people its real origin
 with a ten-minute explanation?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#treatment" id="TOCtreatment">Some (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#treatment">Some (追記ここまで) people laugh at you when
 you ask them to call the system GNU/Linux. Why do you subject yourself
 to this treatment?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#alienate" id="TOCalienate">Some (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#alienate">Some (追記ここまで) people condemn you when you
 ask them to call the system GNU/Linux. Don't you lose by
 alienating them?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#rename" id="TOCrename">Whatever (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#rename">Whatever (追記ここまで) you contributed,
 is it legitimate to rename the operating system?</a></li>
<li><a href="#force">Isn't it wrong to force people to call
 the system “GNU/Linux”?</a></li>
<li><a href="#whynotsue">Why not sue people who call
 the whole system “Linux”?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#BSDlicense" id="TOCBSDlicense">Since (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#BSDlicense">Since (追記ここまで) you objected to the original
 BSD license's advertising requirement to give credit to the University of
 California, isn't it hypocritical to demand credit for the GNU project?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#require" id="TOCrequire">Shouldn't (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#require">Shouldn't (追記ここまで) you put something in
 the GNU GPL to require people to call the system
 “GNU”?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#deserve" id="TOCdeserve">Since (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#deserve">Since (追記ここまで) you failed to put
 something in the GNU GPL to require people to call the system
 (削除) “GNU”, (削除ここまで)
 (追記) “GNU,” (追記ここまで) you deserve what happened; why are you
 complaining now?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#contradict" id="TOCcontradict">Wouldn't (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#contradict">Wouldn't (追記ここまで) you be better off
 not contradicting what so many people believe?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#somanyright" id="TOCsomanyright">Since (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#somanyright">Since (追記ここまで) many people call it
 (削除) “Linux”, (削除ここまで)
 (追記) “Linux,” (追記ここまで) doesn't that make it right?</a></li>
<li><a (削除) href="#winning" id="TOCwinning">Many (削除ここまで) (追記) href="#knownname">Isn't it better to call the
 system by the name most users already know?</a></li>
<li><a href="#winning">Many (追記ここまで) people care about what's convenient or
 who's winning, not about arguments of right or wrong. Couldn't you
 get more of their support by a different road?</a></li>
</ul>
(追記) </div>
<div class="announcement comment" role="complementary">
<p>To learn more about this issue, you can also read
our page on <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">Linux and the GNU System</a>, our
 page on <a href="/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html">Why GNU/Linux?</a>
and our page on <a href="/gnu/gnu-users-never-heard-of-gnu.html">GNU
Users Who Have Never Heard of GNU</a>.</p>
<hr class="no-display" />
</div> (追記ここまで)
<dl>
<dt id="why">Why do you call (削除) it (削除ここまで) (追記) the system we use (追記ここまで) GNU/Linux and not
 Linux? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#why">#why</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>Most operating system distributions based on Linux as kernel are
basically modified versions of the GNU operating system. We began
developing GNU in 1984, years before Linus Torvalds started to write
his kernel. Our goal was to develop a complete free operating system.
Of course, we did not develop all the parts ourselves—but we led the way.
We developed most of the central components, forming the largest single
contribution to the whole system. The basic vision was ours too.
<p>
In fairness, we ought to get at least equal mention.</p>
<p>See <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">Linux and the GNU System</a>
and <a href="/gnu/gnu-users-never-heard-of-gnu.html">GNU Users Who Have
Never Heard of GNU</a> for more explanation, and <a
href="/gnu/the-gnu-project.html">The GNU Project</a> for the
history.</p> </dd>
<dt id="whycare">Why is the name
 important? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#whycare">#whycare</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>Although the developers of Linux, the kernel, are contributing to
the free software community, many of them do not care about freedom.
People who think the whole system is Linux tend to get confused and
assign to those developers a role in the history of our community
which they did not actually play. Then they give inordinate weight to
those developers' views.
<p>
Calling the system GNU/Linux recognizes the role that our idealism
played in building our community, and
<a href="/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html">helps the public recognize the
practical importance of these ideals</a>.</p>
</dd>
<dt (追記) id="what">What is the real relationship between GNU and Linux? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#what">#what</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>The GNU operating system and the kernel named Linux are separate
software projects that do complementary jobs. Typically they are
packaged in a <a href="/distros/distros.html">GNU/Linux distribution</a>, and used
together.</p>
</dd>
<dt (追記ここまで) id="howerror">How did it come about that most
 people call the system “Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#howerror">#howerror</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>Calling the system “Linux” is a confusion that has spread faster
than the corrective information.
<p>
The people who combined Linux with the GNU system were not aware that
that's what their activity amounted to. They focused their attention
on the piece that was Linux and did not realize that more of the
combination was GNU. They started calling it “Linux” even though that
name did not fit what they had. It took a few years for us to realize
what a problem this was and ask people to correct the practice. By
that time, the confusion had a big head start.</p>
<p>
Most of the people who call the system “Linux” have never heard why
that's not the right thing. They saw others using that name and
assume it must be right. The name “Linux” also spreads a false
picture of the system's origin, because people tend to suppose that
the system's history was such as to fit that name. For
instance, they often believe its development was started by Linus
Torvalds in 1991. This false picture tends to reinforce the idea
that the system should be called (削除) “Linux”.</p> (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux.”</p> (追記ここまで)
<p>
Many of the questions in this file represent people's attempts to
justify the name they are accustomed to using.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="always">Should we always say
 “GNU/Linux” instead of “Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#always">#always</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
Not always—only when you're talking about the whole system. When
you're referring specifically to the kernel, you should call it
(削除) “Linux”, (削除ここまで)
(追記) “Linux,” (追記ここまで) the name its developer chose.
<p>
When people call the whole system (削除) “Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux,” (追記ここまで) as a consequence
they call the whole system by the same name as the kernel.
This causes many kinds of confusion, because only experts can tell
whether a statement is about the kernel or the whole system.
By calling the whole system (削除) “GNU/Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/Linux,” (追記ここまで) and calling the kernel
(削除) “Linux”, (削除ここまで)
(追記) “Linux,” (追記ここまで) you avoid the ambiguity.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="linuxalone">Would Linux have
 achieved the same success if there had been no
 GNU? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#linuxalone">#linuxalone</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
In that alternative world, there would be nothing today like the
GNU/Linux system, and probably no free operating system at all. No
one attempted to develop a free operating system in the 1980s except
the GNU Project and (later) Berkeley CSRG, which had been specifically
asked by the GNU Project to start freeing its code.
<p>
Linus Torvalds was partly influenced by a speech about GNU in Finland
in 1990. It's possible that even without this influence he might have
written a Unix-like kernel, but it probably would not have been free
software. Linux became free in 1992 when Linus rereleased it under
the GNU GPL. (See the release notes for version 0.12.)</p>
<p>
Even if Torvalds had released Linux under some other free software
license, a free kernel alone would not have made much difference to
the world. The significance of Linux came from fitting into a larger
framework, a complete free operating system: GNU/Linux.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="divide">Wouldn't it be better for the
 community if you did not divide people with this request? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#divide">#divide</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
When we ask people to say (削除) “GNU/Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/Linux,” (追記ここまで) we are not dividing people. We
are asking them to give the GNU Project credit for the GNU operating
system. This does not criticize anyone or push anyone away.
<p>
However, there are people who do not like our saying this. Sometimes
those people push us away in response. On occasion they are so rude
that one wonders if they are intentionally trying to intimidate us
into silence. It doesn't silence us, but it does tend to divide the
community, so we hope you can convince them to stop.</p>
<p>
However, this is only a secondary cause of division in our community.
The largest division in the community is between people who appreciate
free software as a social and ethical issue and consider proprietary
software a social problem (supporters of the free software movement),
and those who cite only practical benefits and present free software
only as an efficient development model (the open source movement).</p>
<p>
This disagreement is not just a matter of names—it is a matter
of differing basic values. It is essential for the community to see
and think about this disagreement. The names “free
software” and “open source” are the banners of the
two positions.
See <a href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">Why Open
Source misses the point of Free Software</a>.</p>
<p>
The disagreement over values partially aligns with the amount of
attention people pay to the GNU Project's role in our community.
People who value freedom are more likely to call the system
(削除) “GNU/Linux”, (削除ここまで)
(追記) “GNU/Linux,” (追記ここまで) and people who learn that the system is “GNU/Linux” are
more likely to pay attention to our philosophical arguments for
freedom and community (which is why the choice of name for the system
makes a real difference for society). However, the disagreement would
probably exist even if everyone knew the system's real origin and its
proper name, because the issue is a real one. It can only go away if
we who value freedom either persuade everyone (which won't be easy) or
are defeated entirely (let's hope not).</p>
</dd>
<dt id="freespeech">Doesn't the GNU project
 support an individual's free speech rights to call the system by
 any name that individual chooses? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#freespeech">#freespeech</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
Yes, indeed, we believe you have a free speech right to call the
operating system by any name you wish. We ask that people call it
GNU/Linux as a matter of doing justice to the GNU project, to promote
the values of freedom that GNU stands for, and to inform others that
those values of freedom brought the system into (削除) existence. (削除ここまで) (追記) existence.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="everyoneknows">Since everyone knows
 (削除) GNU's (削除ここまで) (追記) the (追記ここまで) role
 (追記) of GNU (追記ここまで) in developing the system, doesn't the “GNU/” in the
 name go without saying? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#everyoneknows">#everyoneknows</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>Experience shows that the system's users, and the computer-using
public in general, often know nothing about the GNU system. Most
articles about the system do not mention the name (削除) “GNU”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU,” (追記ここまで) or the ideals
that GNU stands for. <a
href="/gnu/gnu-users-never-heard-of-gnu.html">GNU Users Who Have Never
Heard of GNU</a> explains further.
<p>
The people who say this are probably geeks thinking of the geeks they
know. Geeks often do know about GNU, but many have a completely wrong
idea of what GNU is. For instance, many think it is a collection
of (削除) <a href="#tools">“tools”</a>, (削除ここまで) (追記) “<a href="#tools">tools</a>,” (追記ここまで) or a project to develop tools.</p>
<p>
The wording of this question, which is typical, illustrates another
common misconception. To speak of “GNU's role” in developing
something assumes that GNU is a group of people. GNU is an operating
system. It would make sense to talk about the GNU Project's role in
this or some other activity, but not that of GNU.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="everyoneknows2">Since I know the role of GNU in this system,
 why does it matter what name I use? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#everyoneknows2">#everyoneknows2</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
If your words don't reflect your knowledge, you don't teach others.
Most people who have heard of the GNU/Linux system think it is
(削除) “Linux”, (削除ここまで)
(追記) “Linux,” (追記ここまで) that it was started by Linus Torvalds, and that
it was intended to be “open (削除) source”. (削除ここまで) (追記) source.” (追記ここまで) If you don't tell
them, who (削除) will? (削除ここまで) (追記) will?</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="windows">Isn't shortening “GNU/Linux”
 to “Linux” just like shortening “Microsoft Windows” to “Windows”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#windows">#windows</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
It's useful to shorten a frequently-used name, but not if the
abbreviation is misleading.
<p>
Almost everyone in developed countries really does know that the
“Windows” system is made by Microsoft, so shortening “Microsoft
Windows” to “Windows” does not mislead anyone as to that system's
nature and origin. Shortening “GNU/Linux” to “Linux” does give the
wrong idea of where the system comes from.</p>
<p>
The question is itself misleading because GNU and Microsoft are
not the same kind of thing. Microsoft is a company;
GNU is an operating system.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="tools">Isn't GNU a collection of
 programming tools that were included in Linux? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#tools">#tools</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
People who think that Linux is an entire operating system, if they
hear about GNU at all, often get a wrong idea of what GNU is. They
may think that GNU is the name of a collection of programs—often they
say “programming (削除) tools”, (削除ここまで) (追記) tools,” (追記ここまで) since some of our programming tools became
popular on their own. The idea that “GNU” is the name of an operating
system is hard to fit into a conceptual framework in which that
operating system is labeled (削除) “Linux”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux.” (追記ここまで)
<p>
The GNU Project was named after the GNU operating system—it's the project
to develop the GNU system. (See <a
href="/gnu/initial-announcement.html">the 1983 initial announcement</a>.)</p>
<p>
We developed programs such as GCC, GNU Emacs, GAS, GLIBC, BASH, etc.,
because we needed them for the GNU operating system. GCC, the GNU
Compiler Collection is the compiler that we wrote for the GNU
operating system. We, the many people working on the GNU Project,
developed Ghostscript, GNUCash, GNU Chess and GNOME for the GNU system
too.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="osvskernel">What is the difference
between an operating system and a kernel? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#osvskernel">#osvskernel</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
An operating system, as we use the term, means a collection of
programs that are sufficient to use the computer to do a wide variety
of jobs. A general purpose operating system, to be complete, ought to
handle all the jobs that many users may want to do.
<p>
The kernel is one of the programs in an operating system—the program
that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that are
running. The kernel also takes care of starting and stopping other
programs.</p>
<p>
To confuse matters, some people use the term “operating system” to
mean (削除) “kernel”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “kernel.” (追記ここまで) Both uses of the term go back many years. The
use of “operating system” to mean “kernel” is found in a number of
textbooks on system design, going back to the 80s. At the same time,
in the 80s, the “Unix operating system” was understood to include all
the system programs, and Berkeley's version of Unix included even
games. Since we intended GNU to be a Unix-like operating system, we
use the term “operating system” in the same way.</p>
<p>
Most of the time when people speak of the “Linux operating system”
they are using “operating system” in the same sense we use: they mean
the whole collection of programs. If that's what you are referring
to, please call it (削除) “GNU/Linux”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/Linux.” (追記ここまで) If you mean just the kernel, then
“Linux” is the right name for it, but please say “kernel” also to
avoid ambiguity about which body of software you mean.</p>
<p>
If you prefer to use some other term such as “system distribution” for
the entire collection of programs, instead of “operating (削除) system”, (削除ここまで) (追記) system,” (追記ここまで)
that's fine. Then you would talk about GNU/Linux system
distributions.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="house">The kernel of a system is like the foundation of a
 house. How can a house be almost complete when it doesn't have a
 foundation? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#house">#house</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
A kernel is not much like the foundation of a house because building
an operating system is not much like building a house.
<p>A house is built from lots of little general parts that are cut and
put together in situ. They have to be put together from the bottom
up. Thus, when the foundation has not been built, no substantial part
has been built; all you have is a hole in the ground.</p>
<p>
By contrast, an operating system consists of complex
components that can be developed in any order. When you have
developed most of the components, most of the work is done. This is
much more like the International Space Station than like a house. If
most of the Space Station modules were in orbit but awaiting one other
essential module, that would be like the GNU system in 1992.
</p>
</dd>
<dt id="brain">Isn't the kernel the brain of the system? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#brain">#brain</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
A computer system is not much like a human body,
and no part of it plays a role comparable to that of
the brain in a (削除) human. (削除ここまで) (追記) human.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="kernelmost">Isn't writing the kernel most of the work in an
operating system? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#kernelmost">#kernelmost</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
No, many components take a lot of (削除) work. (削除ここまで) (追記) work.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="nokernel">An operating system requires a kernel.
 Since the GNU Project didn't develop a kernel, how can
 the system be GNU?<span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#nokernel">#nokernel</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
The people who argue that way for calling the system
“Linux” are using a double standard. An operating system
requires compilers, editors, window systems, libraries, and much
more—hundreds of programs, even to match what BSD systems included
in 1983. Since Torvalds didn't develop any of those, how can the
system be “Linux”?
<p>
That standard is too strict, not the right way to judge the
contributions of any contributor.</p>
<p>
Linus Torvalds made an important contribution to the operating system
we use; the GNU Project started earlier and contributed much more.
The name “GNU/Linux” gives credit to each.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="notinstallable">How can GNU be an
 operating system, if I can't get something called “GNU”
 and install it? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#notinstallable">#notinstallable</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
Many <a href="/distros/distros.html"> packaged and installable
versions of GNU</a> are available. None of them is called simply
“GNU,” but GNU is what they basically are.
<p>
We expected to release the GNU system packaged for installation, but
this plan was overtaken by events: in 1992 others were already
packaging GNU variants containing Linux. Starting in 1993 we
sponsored an effort to make a better and freer GNU/Linux distribution,
called <a href="/distros/common-distros.html#Debian">Debian
GNU/Linux</a>. The founder of Debian had already chosen that name.
We did not ask him to call it just “GNU” because that was
to be the name of a system version with the GNU Hurd kernel—which
wasn't ready yet.</p>
<p>
The GNU Hurd kernel never became sufficiently ready; we only recommend
it to those interested in working on it. So we never packaged GNU
with the GNU Hurd kernel. However, Debian packaged this combination
as Debian GNU/Hurd.</p>
<p>
We are now developing an advanced Scheme-based package manager called
Guix and a complete system distribution based on it called the
<a href="/software/guix">Guix System Distribution</a> or GuixSD.
This includes repackaging a substantial part of the GNU system.</p>
<p>
We never took the last step of packaging GNU under the name
“GNU,” but that doesn't alter what kind of thing GNU is.
GNU is an operating system.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="afterkernel">We're calling the
 whole system after the kernel, Linux. Isn't it normal to name an
 operating system after a kernel? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#afterkernel">#afterkernel</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
That practice seems to be very rare—we can't find any examples other
than the misuse of the name (削除) “Linux”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux.” (追記ここまで) Normally an operating system is
developed as a single unified project, and the developers choose a
name for the system as a whole. The kernel usually does not have a
name of its own—instead, people say “the kernel of such-and-such” or
“the such-and-such (削除) kernel”. (削除ここまで) (追記) kernel.” (追記ここまで)
<p>
Because those two constructions are used synonymously, the expression
“the Linux kernel” can easily be misunderstood as meaning “the kernel
of Linux” and implying that Linux must be more than a kernel. You can
avoid the possibility of this misunderstanding by saying or writing
“the kernel, Linux” or “Linux, the kernel.”</p>
</dd>
<dt (追記) id="feel">Can another system have “the
 feel of Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#feel">#feel</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>
There is no such thing as the “feel of Linux” because
Linux has no user interfaces. Like any modern kernel, Linux is a base
for running programs; user interfaces belong elsewhere in the system.
Human interaction with GNU/Linux always goes through other programs,
and the “feel” comes from them.</p>
</dd>
<dt (追記ここまで) id="long">The problem with “GNU/Linux” is that it is too long.
 How about recommending a shorter name? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#long">#long</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
For a while we tried the name (削除) “LiGNUx”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “LiGNUx,” (追記ここまで) which combines the words “GNU”
and (削除) “Linux”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux.” (追記ここまで) The reaction was very bad. People accept “GNU/Linux”
much better.
<p>
The shortest legitimate name for this system is (削除) “GNU”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU,” (追記ここまで) but
we call it “GNU/Linux” <a href="#justgnu"> for the reasons
given below</a>.</p>
</dd>
<dt (追記) id="long1">How about calling the system
 “GliNUx” (instead of “GNU/Linux”)?
 <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#long1">#long1</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>The name “GNU” does not visibly appear in
“Glinux,” so most people would not notice it is there.
Even if it is capitalized as “GliNUx,” most people would
not realize that it contains a reference to GNU.</p>
<p>It would be comparable to writing “GNU/Linux,” but
putting “GNU/” in print so small that most people could
not read it.</p>
</dd>
<dt (追記ここまで) id="long2">The problem with “GNU/Linux” is that it is too long.
 Why should I go to the trouble of saying “GNU/”?
 <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#long2">#long2</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>It only takes a second to say or type (削除) “GNU/”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/.” (追記ここまで) If you
appreciate the system that we developed, can't you take one second
to recognize our work?</p>
</dd>
<dt (追記) id="long3">Unfortunately, “GNU/Linux” is five
 syllables. People won't use such a long term. Shouldn't you find a
 shorter one?
 <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#long3">#long3</a>)</span></dt>
<dd><p>Actually, “GNU/Linux” is only four syllables.
 “Unfortunately” is five syllables, yet people show no
 sign of reluctance to use that word.</p></dd>
<dt id="long4">Stallman doesn't ask us to call him
 “Richard Matthew Stallman” every the time.
 So why ask us to say “GNU/Linux” every time?
 <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#long4">#long4</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>Omitting “Matthew” does not misrepresent anything
important about Stallman's nature, origin, ideas or purpose. Omitting
“GNU” does misrepresent those things about the GNU/Linux
system.</p>
<p>This is an example of a frequent way of hiding a fallacy: to bury
it inside a misleading analogy. A better analogy would be, “Why
shouldn't we call Stallman ‘Torvalds’?”
</p></dd>
<dt (追記ここまで) id="justgnu">Since Linux is a secondary
 contribution, would it be false to the facts to call the system simply
 “GNU”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#justgnu">#justgnu</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
It would not be false to the facts, but it is not the best thing to
do. Here are the reasons we call that system version “GNU/Linux”
rather than just “GNU”:
<ul>
<li>
It's not exactly GNU—it has a different kernel (that is, Linux).
Distinguishing GNU/Linux from GNU is useful.</li>
<li>
It would be ungentlemanly to ask people to <em>stop</em> giving any
credit to Linus Torvalds. He did write an important component of the
system. We want to get credit for launching and sustaining the
system's development, but this doesn't mean we should treat Linus the
same way those who call the system “Linux” treat us. We strongly
disagree with his political views, but we deal with that disagreement
honorably and openly, rather than by trying to cut him out of the
credit for his contribution to the system.</li>
<li>
Since many people know of the system as (削除) “Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux,” (追記ここまで) if we say “GNU” they
may simply not recognize we're talking about the same system. If we
say (削除) “GNU/Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/Linux,” (追記ここまで) they can make a connection to what they have heard
about.</li>
(削除) </ul><p></p> (削除ここまで)
(追記) </ul> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="trademarkfee">I would have
 to pay a fee if I use “Linux” in the name of a product, and that
 would also apply if I say (削除) “GNU/Linux”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/Linux.” (追記ここまで) Is it wrong if I use “GNU”
 without (削除) “Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux,” (追記ここまで) to save the fee? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#trademarkfee">#trademarkfee</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
There's nothing wrong in calling the system “GNU”; basically, that's
what it is. It is nice to give Linus Torvalds a share of the credit
as well, but you have no obligation to pay for the privilege of doing
so.
<p>
So if you want to refer to the system simply as (削除) “GNU”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU,” (追記ここまで) to avoid paying
the fee for calling it (削除) “Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux,” (追記ここまで) we won't criticize you.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="many">Many other projects contributed to
 the system as it is today; it includes TeX, X11, Apache, Perl, and many
 more programs. Don't your arguments imply we have to give them credit
 too? (But that would lead to a name so long it is
 absurd.) <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#many">#many</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
What we say is that you ought to give the system's principal developer
a share of the credit. The principal developer is the GNU Project,
and the system is basically GNU.
<p>
If you feel even more strongly about giving credit where it is due,
you might feel that some secondary contributors also deserve credit in
the system's name. If so, far be it from us to argue against it. If
you feel that X11 deserves credit in the system's name, and you want
to call the system GNU/X11/Linux, please do. If you feel that Perl
simply cries out for mention, and you want to write GNU/Linux/Perl, go
ahead.</p>
<p>
Since a long name such as GNU/X11/Apache/Linux/TeX/Perl/Python/FreeCiv
becomes absurd, at some point you will have to set a threshold and
omit the names of the many other secondary contributions. There is no
one obvious right place to set the threshold, so wherever you set it,
we won't argue against it.</p>
<p>
Different threshold levels would lead to different choices of name for
the system. But one name that cannot result from concerns of fairness
and giving credit, not for any possible threshold level, is (削除) “Linux”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux.” (追記ここまで)
It can't be fair to give all the credit to one secondary contribution
(Linux) while omitting the principal contribution (GNU).</p>
</dd>
<dt (追記) id="systemd">systemd plays an important role in the GNU/Linux
 system as it is today; are we obligated to call it
 GNU/systemd/Linux? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#systemd">#systemd</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>
systemd is a fairly important component, but not as important as the
kernel (Linux), nor as important as the basis of the system as a whole
(GNU). However, if you want to emphasize the presence of systemd
by calling the system “GNU/systemd/Linux,” there is nothing
wrong with doing so.</p>
</dd>
<dt (追記ここまで) id="others">Many other projects contributed to
 the system as it is today, but they don't insist on calling it
 XYZ/Linux. Why should we treat GNU specially? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#others">#others</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
Thousands of projects have developed programs commonly included in
today's GNU/Linux systems. They all deserve credit for their
contributions, but they aren't the principal developers of the system
as a whole, so they don't ask to be credited as such.
<p>
GNU is different because it is more than just a contributed program,
more than just a collection of contributed programs. GNU is the
framework on which the system was made.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="allsmall">GNU is a small fraction of the system nowadays,
 so why should we mention it? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#allsmall">#allsmall</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
In 2008, we found that GNU packages made up 15% of the
“main” repository of the gNewSense GNU/Linux distribution.
Linux made up 1.5%. So the same argument would apply even more
strongly to calling it (削除) “Linux”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux.” (追記ここまで)
<p>
GNU is a small fraction of the system nowadays, and Linux is an
even smaller fraction. But they are the system's core; the system
was made by combining them. Thus, the name “GNU/Linux”
remains appropriate.
</p>
</dd>
<dt id="manycompanies">Many companies
 contributed to the system as it is today; doesn't that mean
 we ought to call it GNU/Red Hat/Novell/Linux? <span
 class="anchor-reference-id">(<a
 href="#manycompanies">#manycompanies</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>
GNU is not comparable to Red Hat or Novell; it is not a company, or an
organization, or even an activity. GNU is an operating system. (When
we speak of the GNU Project, that refers to the project to develop the
GNU system.) The GNU/Linux system is based on GNU, and that's why GNU
ought to appear in its name.
</p>
<p>
Much of those companies' contribution to the GNU/Linux system lies in
the code they have contributed to various GNU packages including (削除) GCC (削除ここまで) (追記) GCC,
and GNOME versions 1 (追記ここまで) and (削除) GNOME. (削除ここまで) (追記) 2. (追記ここまで) Saying GNU/Linux gives credit to those
companies along with all the rest of the GNU developers.
</p>
</dd>
<dt id="whyslash">Why do you write “GNU/Linux”
instead of “GNU Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#whyslash">#whyslash</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
Following the rules of English, in the construction “GNU Linux” the
word “GNU” modifies (削除) “Linux”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux.” (追記ここまで) This can mean either “GNU's version of
Linux” or “Linux, which is a GNU package.” Neither of those meanings
fits the situation at hand.
<p>
Linux is not a GNU package; that is, it wasn't developed under the GNU
Project's aegis or contributed specifically to the GNU Project. Linus
Torvalds wrote Linux independently, as his own project. So the
“Linux, which is a GNU package” meaning is not right.</p>
<p>
We're not talking about a distinct GNU version of Linux, the kernel.
The free GNU/Linux distros do have
a <a (削除) href="http://directory.fsf.org/project/linux">separate (削除ここまで) (追記) href="https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Linux-libre">separate (追記ここまで) version of
Linux</a>, since the “standard” version contains (削除) non-free (削除ここまで) (追記) nonfree (追記ここまで)
firmware (削除) “blobs”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “blobs.” (追記ここまで) If this were part of the GNU Project,
it could be considered “GNU Linux”; but we would not want
to call it that, because it would be too confusing.</p>
<p>
We're talking about a version of GNU, the operating system,
distinguished by having Linux as the kernel. A slash fits the
situation because it means “combination.” (Think of
(削除) “Input/Output”.) This system is (削除ここまで)
(追記) “Input/Output.”) It's (追記ここまで) the (削除) combination of (削除ここまで) GNU
(削除) and Linux; (削除ここまで) (追記) system, with the kernel
Linux underneath; (追記ここまで) hence, (削除) “GNU/Linux”.</p> (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/Linux.”</p> (追記ここまで)
<p>
There are other ways to express (削除) “combination”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “combination.” (追記ここまで) If you
think that a plus-sign is clearer, please use that. In French, a
hyphen is clear: (削除) “GNU-Linux”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU-Linux.” (追記ここまで) In Spanish, we sometimes
say “GNU con (削除) Linux”.</p> (削除ここまで) (追記) Linux.”</p>
</dd>
<dt id="linuxlibre">Does GNU have its own version of Linux, the kernel? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#linuxlibre">#linuxlibre</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
Yes and no. The free GNU/Linux distros use slightly modified versions
of Linux, modified to remove the nonfree firmware “blobs”
contained in the “standard” release of Linux. Some of
them use <a href="https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Linux-libre">GNU
Linux-Libre</a>, which is the GNU Project's freed version of Linux.
But this is not a fork; rather, it is a version of Linux—we
take the source of each standard Linux release and de-blob it.
<p>
Other free distros make their own arrangements to remove the blobs
from Linux.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="pronounce">How is the name “GNU/Linux”
pronounced? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#pronounce">#pronounce</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>
Please pronounce it as “GNU slash Linux.” If you don't pronounce
the slash, people will think you are saying “GNU Linux,”
which is <a href="#whyslash">not a suitable name for the combination</a>.
</p>
</dd>
<dt id="whynoslash">Why do you write “GNU Emacs”
rather than “GNU/Emacs”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#whynoslash">#whynoslash</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>
Following the rules of English, in the construction “GNU
Emacs” the word “GNU” modifies “Emacs.”
That is the right way to describe a program called Emacs which is a
GNU package.</p>
<p>
“GNU/Emacs” would mean the combination of GNU, the
operating system, and the program Emacs. That doesn't fit this
program, so “GNU/Emacs” is the wrong way to refer to it.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="whyorder">Why “GNU/Linux” rather
than “Linux/GNU”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#whyorder">#whyorder</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
It is right and proper to mention the principal contribution first.
The GNU contribution to the system is not only bigger than Linux and
prior to Linux, we actually started the whole (削除) activity. (削除ここまで) (追記) activity.</p>
<p>
In addition, “GNU/Linux” fits the fact that Linux is the
lowest level of the system and GNU fills technically higher levels.</p> (追記ここまで)
<p>
However, if you prefer to call the system (削除) “Linux/GNU”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux/GNU,” (追記ここまで) that is a lot
better than what people usually do, which is to omit GNU entirely and
make it seem that the whole system is Linux.</p>
</dd>
<dt (追記) id="distronames0">My distro's developers call it
 “Foobar Linux,” but that doesn't say anything about
 what the system consists of. Why shouldn't they call it whatever
 they like? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#distronames0">#distronames0</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
Calling a system “Foobar Linux” implies that it's a flavor
of “Linux,” and people <a href="#distronames">understand
it that way</a>.
<p>
If they called a GNU/Linux distro “Foobar BSD,” you would
call that a mistake. “This system is not BSD,” you
would tell them. Well, it's not Linux either.</p>
</dd>
<dt (追記ここまで) id="distronames">My distro is called
 “Foobar Linux”; doesn't that show it's really Linux? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#distronames">#distronames</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>It means that the people who make the “Foobar Linux” distro are
repeating the common mistake. We appreciate that distributions like Debian, Dragora, Musix, Trisquel, and Venenux have adopted
GNU/Linux as part of their official name, and we hope that if you are involved with a different distribution, you will
encourage it to do the same.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="distronames1">My distro's official name is “Foobar
 Linux”; isn't it wrong to call the distro
 anything but (削除) “Linux”? (削除ここまで) (追記) “Foobar Linux”? (追記ここまで) <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#distronames1">#distronames1</a>)</span></dt>
(削除) <dd><p>If it's allowed for them to change (削除ここまで)
(追記) <dd><p>When they spread misinformation by changing (追記ここまで) “GNU”
to (追記) “Linux,” and call their version of it (追記ここまで) “Foobar (削除) Linux”, (削除ここまで)
(追記) Linux,” (追記ここまで) it's (削除) allowed (削除ここまで) (追記) proper (追記ここまで) for you to (削除) change it back and
call the distro “Foobar GNU/Linux”. It can't be more wrong
to (削除ここまで) correct the (削除) mistake than (削除ここまで) (追記) misinformation by
calling (追記ここまで) it (削除) was to make the mistake.</p></dd> (削除ここまで) (追記) “Foobar GNU/Linux.”</p></dd> (追記ここまで)
<dt id="companies">Wouldn't it be more
 effective to ask companies such as Mandrake, Red Hat and IBM to
 call their distributions “GNU/Linux” rather than asking
 individuals? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#companies">#companies</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
It isn't a choice of one or the other—we ask companies and
organizations and individuals to help spread the word about this. In
fact, we have asked all three of those companies. Mandrake said it
would use the term “GNU/Linux” some of the time, but IBM
and Red Hat were unwilling to help. One executive said, “This
is a pure commercial decision; we expect to make more money calling it
‘Linux’.” In other words, that company did not care
what was right.
<p>
We can't make them do this right, but we're not the sort to give up
just because the road isn't easy. You may not have as much influence
at your disposal as IBM or Red Hat, but you can still help. Together
we can change the situation to the point where companies will make
more profit calling it (削除) “GNU/Linux”.</p> (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/Linux.”</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="reserve">Wouldn't it be better to
 reserve the name “GNU/Linux” for distributions that are purely
 free software? After all, that is the ideal of GNU. <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#reserve">#reserve</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
The widespread practice of adding (削除) non-free (削除ここまで) (追記) nonfree (追記ここまで) software to the GNU/Linux
system is a major problem for our community. It teaches the users
that (削除) non-free (削除ここまで) (追記) nonfree (追記ここまで) software is ok, and that using it is part of the spirit
of (削除) “Linux”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux.” (追記ここまで) Many “Linux” User Groups make it part of their mission to
help users use (削除) non-free (削除ここまで) (追記) nonfree (追記ここまで) add-ons, and may even invite salesmen to come
and make sales pitches for them. They adopt goals such as “helping
the users” of GNU/Linux (including helping them use (削除) non-free (削除ここまで) (追記) nonfree (追記ここまで)
applications and drivers), or making the system more popular even at
the cost of freedom.
<p>
The question is how to try to change this.</p>
<p>
Given that most of the community which uses GNU with Linux already
does not realize that's what it is, for us to disown these adulterated
versions, saying they are not really GNU, would not teach the users to
value freedom more. They would not get the intended message. They
would only respond they never thought these systems were GNU in the
first place.</p>
<p>
The way to lead these users to see a connection with freedom is
exactly the opposite: to inform them that all these system
versions <em>are</em> versions of GNU, that they all are based on a
system that exists specifically for the sake of the users' freedom.
With this understanding, they can start to recognize the distributions
that include (削除) non-free (削除ここまで) (追記) nonfree (追記ここまで) software as perverted, adulterated versions of
GNU, instead of thinking they are proper and appropriate “versions of
(削除) Linux”.</p> (削除ここまで)
(追記) Linux.”</p> (追記ここまで)
<p>
It is very useful to start GNU/Linux User Groups, which call the
system GNU/Linux and adopt the ideals of the GNU Project as a basis
for their activities. If the Linux User Group in your area has the
problems described above, we suggest you either campaign within the
group to change its orientation (and name) or start a new group. The
people who focus on the more superficial goals have a right to their
views, but don't let them drag you along!</p>
</dd>
<dt id="gnudist">Why not make a GNU
 distribution of Linux (sic) and call that GNU/Linux? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#gnudist">#gnudist</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
All the “Linux” distributions are actually versions of the GNU system
with Linux as the kernel. The purpose of the term “GNU/Linux” is to
communicate this point. To develop one new distribution and call that
alone “GNU/Linux” would obscure the point we want to make.
<p>
As for developing a distribution of GNU/Linux, we already did this
once, when we funded the early development of Debian GNU/Linux. To do
it again now does not seem useful; it would be a lot of work, and
unless the new distribution had substantial practical advantages over
other distributions, it would serve no purpose.</p>
<p>
Instead we help the developers of 100% free GNU/Linux distributions,
such as (削除) gNewSense (削除ここまで) (追記) Trisquel (追記ここまで) and (削除) Ututo.</p> (削除ここまで) (追記) Parabola.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="linuxgnu">Why not just say “Linux is
 the GNU kernel” and release some existing version of GNU/Linux under
 the name “GNU”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#linuxgnu">#linuxgnu</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
It might have been a good idea to adopt Linux as the GNU kernel back
in 1992. If we had realized, then, how long it would take to get the
GNU Hurd to work, we might have done that. (Alas, that is hindsight.)
<p>
If we were to take an existing version of GNU/Linux and relabel it as
(削除) “GNU”, (削除ここまで)
(追記) “GNU,” (追記ここまで) that would be somewhat like making a version of the GNU system
and labeling it (削除) “Linux”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux.” (追記ここまで) That wasn't right, and we don't
want to act like that.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="condemn">Did the GNU Project condemn
 and oppose use of Linux in the early days? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#condemn">#condemn</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
We did not adopt Linux as our kernel, but we didn't condemn or oppose
it. In 1993 we started discussing the arrangements to sponsor the
development of Debian GNU/Linux. We also sought to cooperate with the
people who were changing some GNU packages for use with Linux. We
wanted to include their changes in the standard releases so that these
GNU packages would work out-of-the-box in combination with Linux. But
the changes were often ad-hoc and nonportable; they needed to be cleaned
up for installation.
<p>
The people who had made the changes showed little interest in
cooperating with us. One of them actually told us that he didn't care
about working with the GNU Project because he was a “Linux (削除) user”. (削除ここまで) (追記) user.” (追記ここまで)
That came as a shock, because the people who ported GNU packages to
other systems had generally wanted to work with us to get their
changes installed. Yet these people, developing a system that was
primarily based on GNU, were the first (and still practically the
only) group that was unwilling to work with us.</p>
<p>
It was this experience that first showed us that people were calling a
version of the GNU system (削除) “Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux,” (追記ここまで) and that this confusion was
obstructing our work. Asking you to call the system “GNU/Linux” is
our response to that problem, and to the other problems caused by the
“Linux” misnomer.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="wait">Why did you wait so
 long before asking people to use the name GNU/Linux? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#wait">#wait</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>Actually we didn't. We began talking privately with developers and
distributors about this in 1994, and made a more public campaign in
1996. We will continue for as long as it's necessary.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="allgpled">Should the GNU/<i>name</i>
 convention be applied to all programs that are GPL'ed? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#allgpled">#allgpled</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
We never refer to individual programs as (削除) “GNU/<i>name</i>”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/<i>name</i>.” (追記ここまで) When a program
is a GNU package, we may call it “GNU (削除) <i>name</i>”. (削除ここまで) (追記) <i>name</i>.” (追記ここまで)
<p>
GNU, the operating system, is made up of many different programs.
Some of the programs in GNU were written as part of the GNU Project or
specifically contributed to it; these are the GNU packages, and we
often use “GNU” in their names.</p>
<p>
It's up to the developers of a program to decide if they want to contribute
it and make it a GNU package. If you have developed a program and you
would like it to be a GNU package, please write to
<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>, so we can evaluate it
and decide whether we want it.</p>
<p>
It wouldn't be fair to put the name GNU on every individual program
that is released under the GPL. If you write a program and release it
under the GPL, that doesn't mean the GNU Project wrote it or that you
wrote it for us. For instance, the kernel, Linux, is released under
the GNU GPL, but Linus did not write it as part of the GNU Project—he
did the work independently. If something is not a GNU package, the
GNU Project can't take credit for it, and putting “GNU” in its name
would be improper.</p>
<p>
In contrast, we do deserve the overall credit for the GNU operating
system as a whole, even though not for each and every program in it.
The system exists as a system because of our determination and
persistence, starting in 1984, many years before Linux was begun.</p>
<p>
The operating system in which Linux became popular was basically the
same as the GNU operating system. It was not entirely the same,
because it had a different kernel, but it was mostly the same system.
It was a variant of GNU. It was the GNU/Linux system.</p>
<p>
Linux continues to be used primarily in derivatives of that system—in
today's versions of the GNU/Linux system. What gives these systems
their identity is GNU and Linux at the center of them, not particularly
Linux alone.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="unix">Since much of GNU comes
from Unix, shouldn't GNU give credit
to Unix by using “Unix” in its name? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#unix">#unix</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
Actually, none of GNU comes from Unix. Unix was proprietary software
(and still is), so using any of its code in GNU would have been
illegal. This is not a coincidence; this is why we developed GNU:
since you could not have freedom in using Unix, or any of the other
operating systems of the day, we needed a free system to replace it.
We could not copy programs, or even parts of them, from Unix;
everything had to be written afresh.
<p>
No code in GNU comes from Unix, but GNU is a Unix-compatible system;
therefore, many of the ideas and specifications of GNU do come from
Unix. The name (削除) “GNU”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU,” (追記ここまで) which stands for “GNU's Not
(削除) Unix”, (削除ここまで)
(追記) Unix,” (追記ここまで) is a humorous way of giving credit to Unix for this,
following a hacker tradition of recursive acronyms that started in the
70s.</p>
<p>
The first such recursive acronym was TINT, “TINT Is Not
(削除) TECO”. (削除ここまで)
(追記) TECO.” (追記ここまで) The author of TINT wrote another implementation of TECO
(there were already many of them, for various systems), but instead of
calling it by a dull name like “<em>somethingorother</em> (削除) TECO”, (削除ここまで) (追記) TECO,” (追記ここまで) he
thought of a clever amusing name. (That's what hacking
means: <a (削除) href="http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html">playful (削除ここまで) (追記) href="https://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html">playful (追記ここまで)
cleverness</a>.)</p>
<p>
Other hackers enjoyed that name so much that we imitated the approach.
It became a tradition that, when you were writing from scratch a
program that was similar to some existing program (let's imagine its
name was “Klever”), you could give it a recursive acronym name, such
as “MINK” for “MINK Is Not Klever.” In this same spirit we called our
replacement for Unix “GNU's Not (削除) Unix”.</p> (削除ここまで) (追記) Unix.”</p> (追記ここまで)
<p>
Historically, AT&T which developed Unix did not want anyone to
give it credit by using “Unix” in the name of a similar
system, not even in a system 99% copied from Unix. AT&T actually
threatened to sue anyone giving AT&T credit in that way. This is
why each of the various modified versions of Unix (all proprietary,
like Unix) had a completely different name that didn't include
(削除) “Unix”.</p> (削除ここまで)
(追記) “Unix.”</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="bsd">Should we say “GNU/BSD”
too? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#bsd">#bsd</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
We don't call the BSD systems (FreeBSD, etc.) “GNU/BSD” systems,
because that term does not fit the history of the BSD systems.
<p>
The BSD system was developed by UC Berkeley as (削除) non-free (削除ここまで) (追記) nonfree (追記ここまで) software in
the 80s, and became free in the early 90s. A free operating system
that exists today is almost certainly either a variant of the GNU
system, or a kind of BSD system.</p>
<p>
People sometimes ask whether BSD too is a variant of GNU, as GNU/Linux
is. It is not. The BSD developers were inspired to make their code
free software by the example of the GNU Project, and explicit appeals
from GNU activists helped convince them to start, but the code had
little overlap with GNU.</p>
<p>
BSD systems today use some GNU packages, just as the GNU system and
its variants use some BSD programs; however, taken as wholes, they are
two different systems that evolved separately. The BSD developers did
not write a kernel and add it to the GNU system, so a name like
GNU/BSD would not fit the situation.</p>
<p>
The connection between GNU/Linux and GNU is much closer, and that's
why the name “GNU/Linux” is appropriate for it.</p>
<p>
There is a version of GNU which uses the kernel from NetBSD. Its
developers call it “Debian (削除) GNU/NetBSD”, (削除ここまで) (追記) GNU/NetBSD,” (追記ここまで) but “GNU/kernelofNetBSD”
would be more accurate, since NetBSD is an entire system, not just
the kernel. This is not a BSD system, since most of the system
is the same as the GNU/Linux system.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="othersys">If I install the GNU tools
on Windows, does that mean I am running a GNU/Windows system? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#othersys">#othersys</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
Not in the same sense that we mean by (削除) “GNU/Linux”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/Linux.” (追記ここまで) The tools of GNU
are just a part of the GNU software, which is just a part of the GNU
system, and underneath them you would still have another complete
operating system which has no code in common with GNU. All in all,
that's a very different situation from (削除) GNU/Linux. (削除ここまで) (追記) GNU/Linux.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="justlinux">Can't Linux be used without GNU? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#justlinux">#justlinux</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
Linux is used (削除) by itself, or (削除ここまで) (追記) without GNU, often (追記ここまで) with (削除) small (削除ここまで) other (追記) small (追記ここまで) programs, in some
appliances. These small software systems are a far cry from the
GNU/Linux (削除) system. Users do not (削除ここまで) (追記) system, and if users (追記ここまで) install (削除) them (削除ここまで) (追記) one of these (追記ここまで) on (削除) PCs, for instance, and
would (削除ここまで) (追記) their PC, they
will (追記ここまで) find (削除) them (削除ここまで) (追記) it (追記ここまで) rather (削除) disappointing. (削除ここまで) (追記) disappointing, but they are widely used on the
systems they are meant for.</p>
<p>For instance, Linux can be used with the BusyBox mini-userland (we
call this combination BusyBox/Linux), or in some cases with only
application-specific software. (追記ここまで) It is (削除) useful (削除ここまで) (追記) only a small omission (追記ここまで) to (削除) say (削除ここまで) (追記) refer
to BusyBox/Linux as “just Linux;” however, the longer name
makes a distinction (追記ここまで) that (追記) helps people understand (追記ここまで) these
(削除) appliances run (削除ここまで) (追記) systems and
gives credit to the developers of BusyBox.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="howmuch">How much of the GNU system is needed for the system
to be
GNU/Linux? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#howmuch">#howmuch</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
“How much” is not a meaningful question because the GNU
system does not have precise boundaries.
<p>
GNU is an operating system maintained by a community. It includes far
more than (追記ここまで) just (削除) Linux, (削除ここまで) (追記) the GNU software packages (of which we have a specific
list), and people add more packages constantly. Despite these
changes, it remains the GNU system, and adding Linux (追記ここまで) to (削除) show how different those small platforms
are from (削除ここまで) (追記) that yields (追記ここまで)
GNU/Linux. (追記) If you use part of the GNU system and omit part, there is
no meaningful way to say “how much” you used.</p>
<p>
If we look at the level of packages, Linux is one important package in
the GNU/Linux system. The inclusion of one important GNU package is
enough to justify our request for equal mention.
</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="linuxsyswithoutgnu">Are there complete Linux systems (追記) [sic] (追記ここまで) without GNU? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#linuxsyswithoutgnu">#linuxsyswithoutgnu</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
There are complete systems that contain Linux and not GNU; Android is
an example. But it is a mistake to call them “Linux”
(削除) systems. (削除ここまで)
(追記) systems, just as it is a mistake to call GNU a “Linux” system. (追記ここまで)
<p>
Android is very different from the GNU/Linux system—because (削除) it
contains (削除ここまで)
(追記) the two have (追記ここまで) very little (削除) of (削除ここまで) (追記) code in common. In fact, (追記ここまで) the (削除) GNU system, (削除ここまで) only (削除) Linux. Overall, it's a
different system. (削除ここまで) (追記) thing they
have in common is Linux.</p>
<p> (追記ここまで)
If you call the whole (追記) GNU/Linux (追記ここまで) system (削除) “Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux,” (追記ここまで)
you will find it necessary to say things like, “Android contains
Linux, but it isn't Linux, because it doesn't have the usual Linux
[sic] libraries and utilities [meaning the GNU (削除) system].” (削除ここまで) (追記) system].”</p>
<p> (追記ここまで)
Android contains just as much of Linux as GNU/Linux does. What it
doesn't have is the GNU system. Android replaces that with Google
software that works quite differently. (削除) Thus, what (削除ここまで) (追記) What (追記ここまで) makes Android different
(追記) from GNU/Linux (追記ここまで) is the (削除) lack (削除ここまで) (追記) absence (追記ここまで) of GNU.</p>
</dd>
<dt (追記) id="usegnulinuxandandroid">Is it correct to say “using Linux” if it refers to using GNU/Linux and
using Android? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#usegnulinuxandandroidlinuxsyswithoutgnu">#usegnulinuxandandroidlinuxsyswithoutgnu</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
Far from it. That usage is so strained that
people will not understand the intended meaning.
<p>
The public will find it very strange to speak of using Android as
“using Linux.” It's like having a conversation, then
saying you were conversing with the person's intestines or the
person's circulatory system.</p>
<p>
The public <em>will</em> understand the idea of “using
Linux” when it's really GNU/Linux, by way of the usual
misunderstanding: thinking of the whole system as
“Linux.”</p>
<p>
Use of Android and use of GNU/Linux are totally different, as
different as driving a car and riding a bicycle. The fact that the
first two both contain Linux is irrelevant to using them, just as the
fact that a car and a bicycle both have a structure of metal is
irrelevant to using those two. If you wish to talk about using cars
and bikes, you wouldn't speak of “riding metal objects”—not
unless you're playing games with the reader. You would
say, “using cars and bikes.” Likewise, the clear way to
talk about using GNU/Linux and Android is to say “using
GNU/Linux and Android.”</p>
</dd>
<dt (追記ここまで) id="helplinus">Why not call the system
 “Linux” anyway, and strengthen Linus Torvalds' role as posterboy for our
 community? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#helplinus">#helplinus</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
Linus Torvalds is the “posterboy” (other people's choice of word, not
ours) for his goals, not ours. His goal is to make the system more
popular, and he believes its value to society lies merely in the
practical advantages it offers: its power, reliability and easy
availability. He has never advocated
<a href="/philosophy/why-free.html">freedom to cooperate</a> as an
ethical principle, which is why the public does not connect the name
“Linux” with that principle.
<p>
Linus publicly states his disagreement with the free software
movement's ideals. He developed (削除) non-free (削除ここまで) (追記) nonfree (追記ここまで) software in his job for many
years (and said so to a large audience at a “Linux”World show), and
publicly invited fellow developers of Linux, the kernel, to use
(削除) non-free (削除ここまで)
(追記) nonfree (追記ここまで) software to work on it with him. He goes even further, and
rebukes people who suggest that engineers and scientists should
consider social consequences of our technical work—rejecting the
lessons society learned from the development of the atom bomb.</p>
<p>
There is nothing wrong with writing a free program for the motivations
of learning and having fun; the kernel Linus wrote for those reasons
was an important contribution to our community. But those motivations
are not the reason why the complete free system, GNU/Linux, exists,
and they won't secure our freedom in the future. The public needs to
know this. Linus has the right to promote his views; however, people
should be aware that the operating system in question
stems from ideals of freedom, not from his views.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="claimlinux">Isn't it wrong for us to label Linus Torvalds'
 work as GNU? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#claimlinux">#claimlinux</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
It would be wrong, so we don't do that. Torvalds' work is Linux, the
kernel; we are careful not to attribute that work to the GNU Project
or label it as (削除) “GNU”. (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU.” (追記ここまで) When we talk about the whole
system, the name “GNU/Linux” gives him a share of the
(削除) credit. (削除ここまで)
(追記) credit.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="linusagreed">Does Linus Torvalds
 agree that Linux is just the kernel? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#linusagreed">#linusagreed</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>He recognized this at the beginning. The (追記) <a
href="https://ftp.funet.fi/pub/linux/historical/kernel/old-versions/RELNOTES-0.01"> (追記ここまで)
earliest Linux release (削除) notes
said, <a
href="http://ftp.funet.fi/pub/linux/historical/kernel/old-versions/RELNOTES-0.01">
“Most (削除ここまで) (追記) notes</a> said:</p>
<blockquote><p>
Most (追記ここまで) of the tools used with linux are GNU software and are under the
GNU copyleft. These tools aren't in the distribution - ask me (or GNU)
for more (削除) info”</a>.</p> (削除ここまで) (追記) info.
</p></blockquote>
</dd>
<dt id="finishhurd">Why not finish the GNU Hurd kernel, release the GNU system
 as a whole, and forget the question of what to call GNU/Linux?
 <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#finishhurd">#finishhurd</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
We would like credit for the GNU operating system no matter which
kernel is used with it.
<p>Making the GNU Hurd work well enough to compete with Linux would be
a big job, and it's not clearly necessary. The only thing ethically
wrong with Linux as a kernel is its inclusion of firmware
“blobs”; the best fix for that problem
is <a href="https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/priority-projects"> developing
free replacement for the blobs</a>.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="lost">The battle is already lost—society
 has made its decision and we can't change it, so why even think about
 it? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#lost">#lost</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
This isn't a battle, it is a campaign of education. What to call the
system is not a single decision, to be made at one moment by
“society”: each person, each organization, can decide what
name to use. You can't make others say (削除) “GNU/Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/Linux,” (追記ここまで) but
you can decide to call the system “GNU/Linux”
yourself—and by doing so, you will help educate (削除) others. (削除ここまで) (追記) others.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="whatgood">Society has made its
 decision and we can't change it, so what good does it do if I say
 “GNU/Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#whatgood">#whatgood</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
This is not an all-or-nothing situation: correct and incorrect
pictures are being spread more or less by various people. If you call
the system (削除) “GNU/Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/Linux,” (追記ここまで) you will help others learn the system's true
history, origin, and reason for being. You can't correct the misnomer
everywhere on your own, any more than we can, but you can help. If
only a few hundred people see you use the term (削除) “GNU/Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/Linux,” (追記ここまで) you will
have educated a substantial number of people with very little work.
And some of them will spread the correction to (削除) others. (削除ここまで) (追記) others.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="explain">Wouldn't it be better to call
 the system “Linux” and teach people its real origin with a ten-minute
 explanation? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#explain">#explain</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
If you help us by explaining to others in that way, we appreciate your
effort, but that is not the best method. It is not as effective as
calling the system (削除) “GNU/Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU/Linux,” (追記ここまで) and uses your time inefficiently.
<p>
It is ineffective because it may not sink in, and surely will not
propagate. Some of the people who hear your explanation will pay
attention, and they may learn a correct picture of the system's
origin. But they are unlikely to repeat the explanation to others
whenever they talk about the system. They will probably just call it
(削除) “Linux”. (削除ここまで)
(追記) “Linux.” (追記ここまで) Without particularly intending to, they will help spread the
incorrect picture.</p>
<p>
It is inefficient because it takes a lot more time. Saying and
writing “GNU/Linux” will take you only a few seconds a day, not
minutes, so you can afford to reach far more people that way.
Distinguishing between Linux and GNU/Linux when you write and speak is
by far the easiest way to help the GNU Project effectively.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="treatment">Some people laugh at you
 when you ask them to call the system GNU/Linux. Why do you subject
 yourself to this treatment? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#treatment">#treatment</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
Calling the system “Linux” tends to give people a mistaken picture of
the system's history and reason for existence. People who laugh at
our request probably have picked up that mistaken picture—they think
our work was done by Linus, so they laugh when we ask for credit for
it. If they knew the truth, they probably wouldn't laugh.
<p>
Why do we take the risk of making a request that sometimes leads
people to ridicule us? Because often it has useful results that help
the GNU Project. We will run the risk of undeserved abuse to achieve
our goals.</p>
<p>
If you see such an ironically unfair situation occurring, please don't
sit idly by. Please teach the laughing people the real history. When
they see why the request is justified, those who have any sense will
stop laughing.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="alienate">Some people condemn you
 when you ask them to call the system GNU/Linux. Don't you lose by
 alienating them? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#alienate">#alienate</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
Not much. People who don't appreciate our role in developing the
system are unlikely to make substantial efforts to help us. If they
do work that advances our goals, such as releasing free software, it
is probably for other unrelated reasons, not because we asked them.
Meanwhile, by teaching others to attribute our work to someone else,
they are undermining our ability to recruit the help of others.
<p>
It makes no sense to worry about alienating people who are already
mostly uncooperative, and it is self-defeating to be deterred from
correcting a major problem lest we anger the people who perpetuate it.
Therefore, we will continue trying to correct the misnomer.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="rename">Whatever you contributed,
 is it legitimate to rename the operating system? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#rename">#rename</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
We are not renaming anything; we have been calling this system “GNU”
ever since we announced it in 1983. The people who tried to rename
it to “Linux” should not have done (削除) so.</dd> (削除ここまで) (追記) so.</p>
</dd> (追記ここまで)
<dt id="force">Isn't it wrong to force people to call
the system “GNU/Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#force">#force</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
It would be wrong to force them, and we don't try. We call the system
(削除) “GNU/Linux”, (削除ここまで)
(追記) “GNU/Linux,” (追記ここまで) and we ask you to do it (削除) too. (削除ここまで) (追記) too.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="whynotsue">Why not sue people who call
the whole system “Linux”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#whynotsue">#whynotsue</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
There are no legal grounds to sue them, but since we believe in
freedom of speech, we wouldn't want to do that anyway. We ask people
to call the system “GNU/Linux” because that is the right thing to (削除) do. (削除ここまで) (追記) do.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="require">Shouldn't you put something in
 the GNU GPL to require people to call the system “GNU”? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#require">#require</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
The purpose of the GNU GPL is to protect the users' freedom from those
who would make proprietary versions of free software. While it is
true that those who call the system “Linux” often do things that limit
the users' freedom, such as bundling (削除) non-free (削除ここまで) (追記) nonfree (追記ここまで) software with the
GNU/Linux system or even developing (削除) non-free (削除ここまで) (追記) nonfree (追記ここまで) software for such use,
the mere act of calling the system “Linux” does not, in itself, deny
users their freedom. It seems improper to make the GPL restrict what
name people can use for the (削除) system. (削除ここまで) (追記) system.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="BSDlicense">Since you objected to the original BSD license's
advertising requirement to give credit to the University of California,
isn't it hypocritical to demand credit for the GNU project? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#BSDlicense">#BSDlicense</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
It would be hypocritical to make the name GNU/Linux a license
requirement, and we don't. We only <em>ask</em> you to give us the
credit we deserve.
<p>
Please note that there are at least <a (削除) href="/philosophy/bsd.html"> (削除ここまで) (追記) href="/licenses/bsd.html"> (追記ここまで)
two different BSD licenses</a>. For clarity's sake, please don't use
the term “BSD license” without specifying which one.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="deserve">Since you failed to put
 something in the GNU GPL to require people to call the system (削除) “GNU”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “GNU,” (追記ここまで)
 you deserve what happened; why are you complaining now? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#deserve">#deserve</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
The question presupposes a rather controversial general ethical
premise: that if people do not force you to treat them fairly, you are
entitled to take advantage of them as much as you like. In other
words, it assumes that might makes right.
<p>
We hope you disagree with that premise just as we do.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="contradict">Wouldn't you be better
 off not contradicting what so many people believe? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#contradict">#contradict</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
We don't think we should go along with large numbers of people because
they have been misled. We hope you too will decide that truth is
important.
<p>
We could never have developed a free operating system without first
denying the belief, held by most people, that proprietary software
was legitimate and acceptable.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="somanyright">Since many people call
it (削除) “Linux”, (削除ここまで) (追記) “Linux,” (追記ここまで) doesn't that make it right? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#somanyright">#somanyright</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
(追記) <p> (追記ここまで)
We don't think that the popularity of an error makes it the (削除) truth. (削除ここまで) (追記) truth.</p>
</dd>
<dt id="knownname">Isn't it better to call the
 system by the name most users already know? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#knownname">#knownname</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>
Users are not incapable of learning. Since “GNU/Linux”
includes “Linux,” they will recognize what you're talking
about. If you add “(often erroneously referred to as
‘Linux’)” once in a while, they will all understand.</p> (追記ここまで)
</dd>
<dt id="winning">Many people care about what's
 convenient or who's winning, not about arguments of right or wrong.
 Couldn't you get more of their support by a different
 road? <span class="anchor-reference-id">(<a href="#winning">#winning</a>)</span></dt>
<dd>
To care only about what's convenient or who's winning is an amoral
approach to life. (削除) Non-free (削除ここまで) (追記) Nonfree (追記ここまで) software is an example of that amoral
approach and thrives on it. (削除) So (削除ここまで) (追記) Thus, (追記ここまで) in the long run it (削除) is (削除ここまで) (追記) would be (追記ここまで)
self-defeating for us to (削除) bow to (削除ここまで) (追記) adopt (追記ここまで) that approach. We will continue
talking in terms of right and wrong.
<p>
We hope that you are one of those for whom right and wrong do matter.</p>
</dd>
</dl>
(追記) </div> (追記ここまで)
</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
<div (削除) id="footer"> (削除ここまで) (追記) id="footer" role="contentinfo">
<div class="unprintable"> (追記ここまで)
<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to
<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>.
There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p>
<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
 replace it with the translation of these two:
 We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
 translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
 Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
 to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">
 <web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p>
 <p>For information on coordinating and (削除) submitting (削除ここまで) (追記) contributing (追記ここまで) translations of
 our web pages, see <a
 href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
 README</a>. -->
Please see the <a
href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
README</a> for information on coordinating and (削除) submitting (削除ここまで) (追記) contributing (追記ここまで) translations
of this article.</p>
(追記) </div> (追記ここまで)
<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
 files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
 be under CC BY-ND (削除) 3.0 US. (削除ここまで) (追記) 4.0. (追記ここまで) Please do NOT change or remove this
 without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
 Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
 document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
 document was modified, or published.
 If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
 Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
 years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
 year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
 being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
 There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
 Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
<p>Copyright © (削除) 2001, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2013 (削除ここまで) (追記) 2001-2011, 2013-2018, 2020, 2022, 2025 (追記ここまで)
Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p>
<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
(削除) href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creative (削除ここまで)
(追記) href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative (追記ここまで)
Commons (削除) Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States (削除ここまで) (追記) Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (追記ここまで) License</a>.</p>
<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
(削除) <p>Updated: (削除ここまで)
(追記) <p class="unprintable">Updated: (追記ここまで)
<!-- timestamp start -->
$Date: 2025年10月27日 07:31:30 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
(削除) </div> (削除ここまで)
(追記) </div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include --> (追記ここまで)
</body>
</html>