Eh.. what kind of logic? Are you talking about classical logic? Even classical logic is tainted with flaws. Let me give you an example. "If P then P.and P", where P is some proposition is quite legal using classical logic [P => (P /\ P)]. Put P to mean "I have a dollar", and you can easily see that we're in for some trouble. [Girard's linear logic, essentially started in the late 1980s - not too long ago - started addressing these issues.] It is important not to be too hung up on the mechanics of proof theory as much as it is folly to think that one can put concepts such as geometry into the constricting confines of axiomatic theory. How incredibly inelegant and off the point is the standard epsilon-delta proof for continuity! Logic should be taught, but there is no need to grind into the students to boring mechanisms underlying our logic systems. Oh, and please do read the article!

Hold on a second there.

You misunderstand the concept of "works". It "works" means that it works automatically. The user should not have to read the fine manual (that's what RTFM means). It should just work!

Linux has gotten a lot better over the years, but until the user installment process is so easy that anyone can do it, then you have to agree that Linux is still not good enough.

PS: I personally have no problems figuring these things out, after all I have contributed code to the Linux kernel, but it still bugs me that I have to.