GGI ;o) (Was: Re: Boot Logo Thoughts (LONG))

Mike A. Harris (
Sat, 16 May 1998 10:42:56 -0400 (EDT)

On Sat, 16 May 1998, Richard Gooch wrote:

> > > On another note, why do we build gzip into kernel images when something
> > > like bzip2 has come along?
> >
> > Oh, no!!! Not *this* flame-war again! Do we have to touch *every* old
> > stomping-ground this week?
> Looks like it :-( I'm surprised we haven't seen GGI start up again.

Why? Whats wrong with GGI?????!?!?!!!?!?! ;o)

I just downloaded the latest GGI snapshot, and it is cool! ;o)

> This has been a very bad week, and it's been made that way by a bunch
> of little boys sitting in the middle of their respective rooms and
> yelping about some pet issue, and not giving up when Those Who Decide
> (i.e. Those Who Write The Code[tm]) lay down the law.
> Linux is not a democracy, it's a meritocracy. Deal with it.

Linux is a linusocracy. ;o) Linus' hasn't made any horrible
decisions yet, so I say we keep it this way.

One exception: GGI. ;o)


This message was not intended to start another GGI war, but it
probably will. ;o) Sorry, I couldn't resist...

What I'd like to see more than GGI in the kernel, is the GGI
patches working by default with a modern kernel like 2.0.3[34].


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to