[arch-general] Future of 'kernel26'

[mathieu p]

2011/5/25, cantabile <cantabile.desu at gmail.com>:
> On 05/25/2011 09:36 PM, Ray Rashif wrote:
>> On 25 May 2011 23:38, Heiko Baums<lists at baums-on-web.de>  wrote:
>>> Linux3.0 can easily cause misunderstandings as Linux is usually used as
>>> a generic term for the whole system, the distros, etc. even if the
>>> correct naming of the whole system is GNU/Linux and Linux itself
>>> actually is only the kernel.
>>
>> I agree. I'd like for the package to be called simply 'kernel'. That
>> fits in with our straightforward approach to package-naming (and
>> packaging in general). As long as we can linguistically correlate the
>> commands, for .eg:
>>
>> "I want a kernel for this system" == pacman -S kernel
>>
>> A derivative distribution or third-party repository which does not use
>> the Linux kernel can then still provide a 'kernel' package.
> hurr durr
>
> Package names (ours at least) usually go by the project's name, as far
> as I can see.
>
> +1 for "linux"
>
> --
> cantabile - proudly contributing to the bikeshedding :p
>
> "Jayne is a girl's name." -- River
>
+1 for "linux" too