- Legacy - lists.gtalug.org

IMHO!!: The proper global response to SCO v. IBM.
by blanco-S8qYAnHmZTt34ZA5RureAJ4VBq8PJc8F＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

First Draft of An Open Letter to the Linux Community re: SCO v. IBM. -------------------------------------------------------------------- by Max Blanco The roots of this project we call "linux" are in Finland. It was tended by a theretofore unknown programmer that goes by the name of "Linus Torvalds". As the story has been told to me, Mr. Torvalds knew three things about how he wanted to subvert the UNICes of the day: 1) he wanted it to look and feel similar to "The Real Thing"TM; 2) he wanted it to be "free"; 3) he knew NOTHING at all about how the internals of the code worked. The third point was the key: as he knew nothing about how the code worked, he could set up what we now know as an Request-for-Comments (RFC) process. He knew the BEHAVIOUR of the system, a type of indirection named, in electrical engineering terms, after two electrical engineers: Mr. Thevenin and Mr. Norton. You can find out more about these two gentlemen, to whom are devoted the majority of second-year EE courses at <http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/thevenin.html> and <http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/norton.html>. Devices of this type are also known as "black boxes". Mr. Torvalds *isolated himself* (not too difficult in wintertime Finland, I should think!) and came up with a novel implementation, or flavour, of UNIX. An example may be in order at this point to concretize your thoughts. I will use the example of the "ls" command. At every point in an operating system's (OS's) life to date, a human being (man) must interface with the computer to query the contents of the filesystem with which he interfaces. The input the man gives to the computer is known as "ls" (and appropriate command line switches; see "man ls" for these). The output by the OS to the screen is organized in columnar, alphabetized fashion. A typical example might look like this: [root at gloucester: ~/perlsnippets] % <--rest state [root at gloucester: ~/perlsnippets] % ls <--input fix.nov.pl fixofman.pl <--output fixbfaut.pl takemailaddresses.pl <--output [root at gloucester: ~/perlsnippets] % <--rest state Mr. Torvalds did NOT know how one of the original development teams of UNIX accomplished this feat, but he did know the iputs and outputs of the "ls" system. By replicating the entire UNIX tree, he eventually had a working flavour of UNIX. This OS was baptized "linux" when it was released in the early 1990s. Fast forward to 2003. International Bussiness Machines (IBM), the progenitor of the system on which linux was developed and one of the largest global corporations, belatedly has noticed this free software effort and is preying on its success. The suits at IBM know a good thing when they see it: they need to reduce costs, and a free OS is hard to resist. The fact that many of IBM's corporate clients have noticed this linux OS is another reason to hop on the bandwagon. That the suits at IBM have not been the only ones to notice linux is witnessed by the following excerpt: " In March of this year, The SCO Group (formerly Caldera International) announced that they intend to seek damages from IBM, claiming that IBM had released code included in the Linux kernel that was actually their Intellectual Property. "(CLIC press release, August 23, 2003) The Canadian Linux Interests Coalition (CLIC) has been formed as of August 22, 2003 "to refute SCO's claims against Linux and Linux Users everywhere". Corporations exist to funnel lucre to their shareholders while maintaining a cushy job for their own corporate managers. Corporations--fictive bodies all--must employ lawyers if they are to exist. Lawsuits are instigated to achieve the aims of corporations; this is one possible means for lawyers to justify their existence. Corporations can be seen to exist as life support systems for the benefit of certain lawyers. (Corporations cannot "exist" in a literal--by this I mean physically real--sense.) This can be contrasted with inter-personal (i.e. man-to-man) relationships, in which the overriding object is to avoid courts of law. The development of "linux" was free of lawsuits until recently. The development of "linux" was free of corporations until recently. The development of "linux" had been a cottage industry, in which physically real individuals had contributed code to the "linux" community, since its inception. No longer is this the case. With the permission granted by natural persons to allow artificial or fictive bodies to contribute to the "linux" community, a snake was introduced to their eden. The inception of lawsuits over linux has its roots intermixed inextricably with the onset of the onslaught of corporations. Corporations "exist" to shield human beings from liability. The lawsuit which CLIC was formed to address is a battle between two corporations. I should be remiss if I failed to bring this to your notice. The lawsuit apparently involves 27 lines of code, which the SCO Group maintains IBM "stole" *and contributed to* the linux code base. No natural person in full possession of his senses would have ever performed such a feat of happy-enstance. IMHO, this whole mess can be best avoided if the linux project is returned to its roots by its contributors: an RFC process documenting the prescribed inputs and desired outputs should be given to a programmer with no prior knowledge of the 27 lines of contested code; His creation will be free of legal encumbrance. Let the legal fictions battle in court. I have no interest in seeing the linux code base polluted by the actions of fictive legal bodies. The whole linux community should exclude forevermore contributions by fictive legal bodies, through democratic vote if need be. The list of kernel contributors is known. IBM, along with its employees, would have one voice. The same distribution of voices would prevail for other fictive legal bodies. Perhaps the human, natural, person will, upon reading this document, agree with me to save this linux project from embroilment with legal fictions. The ideal result would be to have natural pesons who contribute to the development of the linux code base proscribe contributions from artificial persons. The institution of a Thevenin-Norton-Torvalds RFC process to solve this fictive impasse may be one of the avenues possible to return this idyll to its natural state: a cottage industry in which natural persons contribute to the weal of the whole community. --30-- -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

SCO has valid case
by emir-rdkfGonbjUTTQjIoRn/dzw＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rick Tomaschuk wrote: | Having viewed the presentation, SCO has a convincing argument to claim | damages from IBM for 2.4-2.6 kernel for multirocessor, JFS, etc. code. | MY UNDERSTANDING is that it is not SCO's intention to undermine the | Linux effort but rather to survive as a "for profit" company in a free | market. Provisions will be made for Linux...stay tuned to SCO! As for | the "greek" code or otherwise in the powerpoint this was how it was | presented PRIOR to NDA. My understanding is that SCO owns copyrights | and trademarks for UNIX SYSTEM V. Most other (nearly all) UNIXes are | based upon licences from SYSTEM V (AT&T) so SCO is at the root of the | UNIX tree. I'm as amazed to hear all this as is everyone. As for | reporters and their articles I've read and will continue to read all I | can find. Your understanding obviously sucks. SCO has failed to make it as a legitimate tech business so they turned to a holding company that intends to make money through litigation. What they're doing can't be described as anything but harmful, striking Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt into hearts of IT managers who'd like to adopt Linux as a cheaper, more reliable platform but are worried of the legal liabilities they may be assuming with that. Furthermore, they have declared GPL illegal, and GPL stands at the base of the Linux, and indeed Free Software, Movement. How could this possibly not an attempt to harm it? However, I'm not suprised that your understanding sucks, for you are so obviously uninformed, not only on the current issue (SCO vs. IBM) but on the UNIX history in general. Before you embarass yourself in pulic again, I strongly advise you to learn some of this history, and pay particular attention ~ to the following keywords: AT&T, Berkeley, System V, 4.4BSD. I'm not here to teach you (I'm here to make fun of you), but suffice to say SCO *is not* at the root of the UNIX tree. - -- Emir. "If there's anything more important than my ego around, ~ I want it caught and shot now." [Zaphod Beeblebrox] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE/R2UuuSy542G+Z7QRAougAKCBTiG5WbvpzrhWajd87gZrBwbhSgCfVXvt YWvzw1GltBKdkSYqxNkNBnY= =aHlJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

Code Monkey???
by emir-rdkfGonbjUTTQjIoRn/dzw＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rick Tomaschuk wrote: | Get a wife and have some kids. Sounds like you have some sort of void | in your life. ;>) So one should get married and have kids not for the love of their partner but to fill a void in their life? Is that why *you* got married? - -- Emir. "If there's anything more important than my ego around, ~ I want it caught and shot now." [Zaphod Beeblebrox] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE/R2HDuSy542G+Z7QRAgHFAJsEAxmHXi0AryUHmMYMsf/PZaazMQCfYGsh A8t1FVewFYVcgFHk4QXZlVA= =rxFB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

City of Toronto using Linux (on the desktop, yet!)
by pmills-5bG9SNWDbRX3fQ9qLvQP4Q＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

On Friday, August 22, 2003, at 05:20 PM, Max Blanco wrote: > I didn't see your letter in today's online version of the G+M. Doesn't look like I made the cut. Conversely, there's an article in this morning's business section about heroic IT workers putting in long hours to cope with worms, viruses, and electrical blackouts. Aaaarrrrrghhh! (I was once the coworker of a Help Desk manager who was very proud of the enormous number of calls his staff handled each week. Ummm, what if you provided systems that didn't need that much support? Hmmmm?) > Care to share? Sure. ===== If it hurts, don't do it. ===== Each time I read an article about another worm or virus attacking computer systems (Blaster Worm hampering power repair, Aug. 20; Viruses eat away at firms' productivity, Aug. 21), I am dismayed that the authors portray the affected organizations as victims. Damage from malicious computer code is not at all like the result of some mysterious, chaotic force of nature; it is the predictable outcome of a business decision. The very design of some Microsoft products, emphasizing convenience over security, invites and enables attacks of technological vandalism. Since at least the Melissa virus (1999) and the Code Red worm (2001), we've known that exposing Microsoft mail and server software to the Internet increases the risk of damage and downtime compared to all the safer -- and often cheaper -- alternatives. It's the business equivalent of smoking cigarettes in a public place: it can kill you while it harms and annoys those around you. For companies to put themselves at unnecessary risk is a waste of their resources. For government organizations to do so is an abuse of the public trust. ===== ........................ Phillip Mills Multi-platform software development (416) 224-0714 -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

A Canadian Response to SCO
by blanco-S8qYAnHmZTt34ZA5RureAJ4VBq8PJc8F＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

On 22 Aug 2003, Matthew Rice wrote: > Hi everyone, > > This has been forwarded from the NewTLUG mailing list. Bill Traynor [the > original poster] hasn't been able to send this to TLUG. Well, at least he > and I haven't seen it show up on the list. > > So I'm trying. > Can I read somewhere about how this issue affects the little guy? I have a 1995 distro of redhat. Does this affect me? What about if I have a 2.2 kernel built in 2000? CLIC has been up in arms over the courtroom theatrics, but how about the substance? It hasn't been clear to me why I should care. (Sorry if that's a little blunt.) If I read this right, as long as you stick to 2.4 kernel code, who cares? Can you delete the offending 27 lines of code from the kernel and still make it crash proof and kickass...? -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

Netscape lock & purge
by aitken-BwLjziHGQLusTnJN9+BGXg＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

Netscape is giving the following error: "Netsacape has detected a /home/chris/.netscape/lock file..." It goes on to suggest I delete the offending file and restart Netscape. However, ls -a /home/chris/.netscape reveals no such file. The only out-of-the ordinary thing I've done recently is to load my saved mail from a backup after a recent re-image (instead of kissing my old mail goodbye as I usually do). Probelm 2 is that my Netscape mail reader won't delete the mail off the server even though I have selected 'When deleting a messge locally, remove it from the server' in the mail preferneces. I have to manually remove the email through webmail. Any ideas would be appreciated. Chris -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

A Canadian Response to SCO
by matt-s/rLXaiAEBtBDgjK7y7TUQ＠public.gmane.org 22 Aug '03

22 Aug '03

Hi everyone, This has been forwarded from the NewTLUG mailing list. Bill Traynor [the original poster] hasn't been able to send this to TLUG. Well, at least he and I haven't seen it show up on the list. So I'm trying.

1 0

Code Monkey???
by matt-s/rLXaiAEBtBDgjK7y7TUQ＠public.gmane.org 22 Aug '03

22 Aug '03

Lloyd D Budd <lloyd-fEEwcc3XMu8jODpR/OX0VQ at public.gmane.org> writes: > On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 17:47, Emir wrote: > > I thought I was having a discussion in technical forum, never thought this was > > about winning or losing. Back on topic, "They have a valid case" is a > > statement of fact, if you wanted to state an opinion, you'd have said "They > > *seem* (or *appear*) to have a valid case" or "I'd say they have a valid > > case". See the difference? > > Emir, you *appear* to be having too much fun. It has been a while since > you graced TLUG with such foolishness. The scary thing is that he's making some sense this time :) He must have left himself logged in somewhere. -- matthew rice <matt-s/rLXaiAEBtBDgjK7y7TUQ at public.gmane.org> starnix inc. phone: 905-771-0017 x242 thornhill, ontario, canada http://www.starnix.com professional linux services & products -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

SCO has valid case
by rufmetal-MwcKTmeKVNQ＠public.gmane.org 22 Aug '03

22 Aug '03

On 22 Aug 2003 20:10:25 -0000 <rickl-ZACYGPecefkNbK0NzMECUg at public.gmane.org> wrote: Can I get a copy please? rufmetal-ld0jrThsSZM at public.gmane.org ~ C -- Well I thought you beat "The Death of Inevitability" to death--just a little bit! ~ Tragically Hip -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

throuh which /dev port does "chat" cmd look?
by tim-s/rLXaiAEBtBDgjK7y7TUQ＠public.gmane.org 22 Aug '03

22 Aug '03

Max Blanco <blanco-S8qYAnHmZTt34ZA5RureAJ4VBq8PJc8F at public.gmane.org> writes: > Through which /dev port does "chat" cmd look? > > I can't find this info anywhere in the chat man page. > There exists no "usr/share/doc/chat" directory. I believe it reads from standard input and writes to standard output. If you're using it with PPP, pppd arranges to connect its standard input and standard output to the relevant tty. -- tim writer <tim-s/rLXaiAEBtBDgjK7y7TUQ at public.gmane.org> starnix inc. tollfree: 1-87-pro-linux thornhill, ontario, canada http://www.starnix.com professional linux services & products -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0