Disputatio:Linux

Declension

Is it maybe Linux, Linucis (fem.?) or is Linux indeclinable? --Roland (disp.) 08:43, 15 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

The x in these things is commonly declined (albeit half-jocularly) in English as if it were -x, -cis. Hence Unix, plur. Unices, whence Minix, Minices, and thus Linux, Linuces. But one would be justified in treating it either way. Presumably it'd be masculine, agreeing with nucleus ‘kernel.’ —Myces Tiberinus 11:16, 15 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

I added an expliation of the difference between Linux and GNU/Linux, declineing "GNU/Linux" as one word: "GNU/Linux, GNU/Linucis" rather than "GNUis/Linucis."

linux in latin

anyone know if their if any software/packages/etc have be translated into Latin? Probably, considering how few the target audience would be... but I thought I'd ask. - Duomillia

Mediawiki has been translated into Latin. ;-) --Rolandus 06:54, 13 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

I think Doumillia is asking if there is language support for Latin in the Linux operating system, ie so that, if the language Latin is selected, the system applications icons, application names and GUI descriptions are automatically translated into Latin. Linux has such support for most languages, e.g. spanish, french, japanese, chinese, etc., etc.. Right now I use Ubuntu/Feisty fawn, and unfortunately as it stands there isn't much language support for Latin. I am interested in getting it for my pc. It would be really cool--ille re vera!. If I find out how to create the necessary translation files, I would happily create them and make them available.Rafaelgarcia 01:44, 6 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Linux (as a kernel) has no support for translations whatsoever. What you are talking about is a latin translation of UI and applications, and there are several projects, e.g. for GNOME here: http://l10n.gnome.org/languages/la, for KDE was one here: http://l10n.kde.org/team-infos.php?teamcode=la Sadly, the projects seem.... unfinished (and that is an understatement :-)) Rgrg 14:37, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)

It looks like there may be a glibc locale for latin, but I am having trouble finding it. For you Ubuntu users I did find: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/langpack-locales/+bug/234105. It says that the langpack-locales-2.7.9-5 has the latin locale. Does anyone know where to get it to compile GlibC from scratch?

Nomen et impressa publica

IacobusAmor scripsit: " Quae sunt ea "impressa publica"? et re vera "Linux" appellantur?"

I translated "public trademark" as "impressa publica". Linux was so named by its creator Linus Torvalds who combined Linus and unix into one word. The various operating systems based on the Linux kernel are popularly referred to as Linux operating systems.--Rafaelgarcia 14:22, 24 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

systematis aut systematibus?

--Alex1011 08:16, 21 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Nomina Graeca neutri generis in -ma exeuntia tertia declinatione utuntur: systema, -matis, -mati, -ma, -mate; -mata, -matum, -matibus, -mata, -matibus. --Fabullus 08:53, 21 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Gratias. Puto me in Voce Latina etiam "systematis" loco "systematibus" vidisse. Fortasse error fuit. --Alex1011 09:01, 21 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Heu, credo te recte dicere. Apud Ciceronem, in Oratore 70.11, legere possumus: 'huius ignoratione non modo in vita sed saepissime et in poematis et in oratione peccatur.' Hoc includam in pagina mea de nominibus Graecis. --Fabullus 11:22, 21 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Vocabula Graeca sunt perdifficilia, nonne?!--Rafaelgarcia 11:32, 21 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Nonnulla de declinatione nominum neutri generis in -ma exeuntium scripsi. Vide hic. Salvete --Fabullus 09:51, 23 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't notice this discussion when I changed systematis to systematibus. I was basing my edit on the entry in Whitaker's words. Didn't notice it was an uncommon medieval form and forgot about system being greek.--66.153.117.118 22:13, 25 Novembris 2007 (UTC)

changes

I made some changes to try to correct some grammar. Some of it seemed wrong to me, but I haven't really studied latin for a while, so I could be wrong.--66.153.117.118 21:51, 25 Novembris 2007 (UTC)

problems with the page as it stands

The way the page is now pitched, the first line says that Linux is a kernel and then later in the page takes about Linux the operating system. And in between it confusingly vacillates between Linux and GNU/Linux. THe last phrase in the first sentence makes no sense where it appears--is it an argument? It seems yet again a wikipedia article is the victim of a user who is trying to argue a language/naming issue rather than writing an intelligible, informative article on something.

The page needs to be written to follow the lemma. The english link links to the english page on Linux the oeprating system which is sometimes called GNU/Linux instead by some who are knowledgeable of its origins. The english wiki talks about the linux kernel on a separate page. Given that this page is mostly about the operating system, I propose that it should be revised along the lines of the english page.--Rafaelgarcia 17:44, 17 Iulii 2008 (UTC)

De: "I propose that it should be revised along the lines of the english page." I agree—and not just here, but everywhere! In particular, our religious articles that don't follow the structure of their English counterparts always betray underlying biases. If you check the history of the article Iter Neocatechumenale, you'll see how I tried to change the first paragraph so it would contain the basics of the English version, but it relentlessly got changed back & amplified by someone with an agenda. IacobusAmor 18:28, 17 Iulii 2008 (UTC)

It seems that someone has added GNU as a distribution of Linux. This seems hard to believe when the GNU operating system uses Hurd and not Linux as its kernel [1]. The Hurd is not yet stable so many people replace it with BSD or Linux, but to call GNU a Linux distribution is incorrect because officially GNU does not use the Linux kernel. It is important to note the difference between GNU and GNU/Linux. Because the Hurd is not finish many GNU users replace it with the Linux kernel. This combination of GNU and Linux is GNU/Linux. Linux refers to the kernel developed by Linus; GNU refers to the operating system developed by the Free Software Foundation; the GNU project refers to the effort to write GNU. A distribution combines the software from GNU/Linux which other packages. GNU/Linux cannot be considered a distribution either because they are all modified version of GNU/Linux. If the Linux kernel is not used it is not a Linux distribution. It is important not to confuse these ideas if we are going to write clear, correct articles about them. --Modestus 01:03, 23 Iulii 2008 (UTC)

Oh I did not appreciate that difference from reading the GNU page: It says: "quamquam medulla officialis est GNU Hurd, medulla Linux plerumque adsumitur. haec mixto GNU/Linux appellitur. genitor est Richardus Stallman, qui quoque Free Software Foundation instituit" ->Although the official core is GNU Hurd, the Linux core is frequenty taken up. THis mixing is called GNU/Linux. THe creator is Richard Stallman, who...." Apart from the bad usages Medulla instead of Nucleus, I think its saying that GNU operating system uses either HURD or Linux kernel. SO is the GNU page wrong?--Rafaelgarcia 01:09, 23 Iulii 2008 (UTC)

I say lets use the terms as in the english pages. These things were developed by the english speaking world, so I think we can trust that the english wiki has it right. The english wikipedia page has a "Linux" operating system page (which some people call GNU/Linux) and a "Linux kernel" page. Then there is a page on the "GNU" operating system, which is described as either using the "Linux" kernel (unofficially and then called Linux) or using using the "GNU Hurd" kernel (officially, the kernel being is so named because it is developed by GNU ), and finally there is the "GNU project" which developed all the GNU software. Finally there is a page on the "GNU/Linux naming controversy".--Rafaelgarcia 01:30, 23 Iulii 2008 (UTC)

In mundi mercatu ---> In mundo mercatu

Care 62.24.66.158, mutasti "In mundi mercatu" ad "In mundo mercatu." Quid significat haec sententia arcana? IacobusAmor 21:41, 10 Decembris 2008 (UTC)

eum correxi.--Rafaelgarcia 22:12, 10 Decembris 2008 (UTC)