| I think most folks here know all of the above. The point you might be overlooking is that the GNU userland was established back in the 80s. Most UNIXes (there were many, and at least a dozen "common" ones) shipped with AT&T or custom or (later) BSD versions of these userland tools. GNU was brilliant because it was portable to most of those pathologically differentiated UNIXes, and it meant that arguments and behaviors were predictable, after you installed the GNU tools. Then along came Linux. Of course it used the GNU tools. Everyone used GNU tools. The different part was that the kernel was free and not BSD (which had recently emerged from serious political and licensing drama, and -- if the old story is to be believed -- Linus was completely unaware of). Soon there were dozens of operating systems sharing that kernel. The important categorization of them is that they were all Linux. And yeah, they ran the GNU userland, like every other non-pathological UNIX that wasn't BSD. Any other choice would have been hugely surprising (and doomed Linux). So yes, GNU deserves prominence. But "GNU" wasn't omitted from the common naming due to any hostility or ignorance. It was just obvious, and not new or noteworthy in that sense. It hurt RMS's feelings, and he has been vocal about it. Everyone agrees that GNU deserves much respect, but many people are turned off by the way RMS has reacted to his feelings of disappointment. It's not fair, but few things in life are, and many people have difficulty sympathizing with RMS. |