Why userland , basesystem and Kernel are together?!

[Jerry McAllister]

> 
> I don't wish to get into a shouting match, but I don't think I
> completely agree with some of the things you say here.
> 

OK.  Well, just toddle on over to the advocacy list where this
can more appropriately be hashed out.

////jerry

> On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 11:39, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> > You are comparing apples and oranges. Linux is a kernel, not an
> > operating system. "Distributions" is a specially ill-choosen word in
> > the Linux world. 
> 
> I don't see why. I think "distribution" is a perfectly fine term for
> what it describes. My comments below explain why.
> 
> > There are several operating systems, Debian, RedHat,
> > Mandrake, which only have in common to use the Linux kernel. 
> 
> This is incorrect. All relevant Linux distributions are not only based
> on the same kernel, but almost almost all of the same userland software
> as well. (Specifically, GNU software, much of which is a core part of
> FreeBSD as well.) The main areas where they differ are the configuration