🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <398@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca> lyndon@cs.athabascau.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes:
>rms@AI.MIT.EDU (Richard Stallman) writes:
>
>>Since our main goal is to produce a single complete operating system,
>>supporting its components on other systems is secondary at best.  We
>>can't afford to support all of them.
>
>This makes no sense to me. What good is a "single complete operating
>system" if it only runs on a few select hardware platforms? 

	I have to agree with Lyndon Nerenberg.  If I am not mistaken, the
article that was printed in Unix World(tm) some time back (maybe about this
time last year?) that dealt with the GNU project and the availability of
software from the net; stated that the "purpose was to put portable software
into the hands of users".  That by no means is a direct quote, but I believe
it to be at least the point of that portion of the article.  
	Despite this notion of putting software into the hands of the "people"
concept, I'm seeing what amounts to just another group supporting their own
product.  In my mind GNU is doing the same as AT&T is doing with System V.
After all System V has been ported by other vendors (with some help no doubt)
from AT&T, there is at least various PC based System Vs as well as the 
Motarola version.
	We can say one thing for GNU, it is widely distributed through the
acedemic community...via BSD based Suns, Concurrents, etc.