SCO vs. Linux cīņa turpinās

Godīgi sakot es īpaši nesekoju līdzi notikumiem, kas saistīti ar SCO vs. Linux. Neesmu nekāds linux fans, lai tagad satrauktos par šīm cīņām, kur kāds grib uzvārīties. Pat, ja tiešām pierādītu, ka Linux izejas kodā atrodas SCO intelektuālais īpašums, nāktos pāriet uz Unix sistēmām. Man pēc būtības īpaši neuztrauc vai uz servera griežas Linux vai Unix operētājsistēma. Pat stilīgāk būtu, ja visur lietotu OpenBSD.

Neatkarīgi no tā vai mēs sekojam līdzi, vai nē, bet cīņa turpinās. Šobrīd man ir grūti spriest par to, kam lielāka taisnība. Ja pirms kāda laika SCO nepublicēja izejas kodu gabalus kurus uzskata par savu intelektuālo īpašumu, kas ir iekļauts Linux kodolā, tad tagad jau ir pieejama šī informācija.

Diskusija par šiem koda gabaliem ir atrodama iekš Slashdot.org. Interesants raksts ir atrodams Internet week lapā. Interesants man šķita šis raksts tieši tāpēc, ka tas apkopo divu neatkarīgu Linux advokātu pētījumus.

“SCO is right where it doesn’t matter and wrong where it does,” said Eric Raymond, in a paper posted to the Web, “SCO’s Evidence: This Smoking Gun Fizzles Out.”

Some of Linux code was copied from old Unix versions, but “the relevant ancestral code was released in open source” before it was included in Linux. Much of it was released by SCO itself, while it was still doing business as Caldera, Raymond said.

Kā arī

In addition to Raymond, another Linux advocate, Bruce Perens, obtained copies of the slides and posted his own analysis, separate from Raymond’s, (“Analysis of SCO’s Las Vegas Slide Show.”), reaching similar conclusions.

Citus karstākos jaunumus par tēmu kā vienmēr var atrast Googlē.

18 komentāri par “SCO vs. Linux cīņa turpinās

  1. Huh

    Par taam bildeem, kur redzams saliidzinaashanas rezultaats… Sakriit dazhas komentaaru rindinjas… A pats labaakais – “aizkripteetajaa” SCO koda daljaa (fonts nomainiits uz Symbol) komentaars turpinaas par “following assembler code”, kameer Linuxaa tajaa vietaa ir C kods.

    Atbildēt
  2. Pecis

    Ja taa godiigi, coolynx un citu BSD fanu ‘mieriigumam’ nav iisti pamata – SCO solijaas ‘aizkjert’ arii juusu miiljo opereetaajsisteemu. Probleema ir citur – Makbraids ljoti skaidri deklameeja, ka vinjsh un vinja kompaanija netic briivaas programmatuuras principiem un ciiniisies pret tiem. arii pret BSD.
    Neonz: BSD kaa licenze programmeetaajiem dod lielaaku briiviibu, tachu mazaak kods tiek atgriezts atpakalj, jo to licenze obligaati neprasa. GPL ir vairaak domaats, lai projekts tieshaam atiistiitos un buutu dziivot speejiigs, lai cilveeki to kodu dotu atpakalj. Bet nu taapeec jau to licenzhu ir daudz – iespeeja ir izveeeleeties.
    Bet kopsumaa ieteiktu IT cilveekiem neiespringt par SCO un tieshi otraadi – vairaak maaciities Linux/BSD, jo taa ir naakotne. Gribat to vai nee.
    Pecis, (baaaaaaisi sen biju M$ fans)

    Atbildēt
  3. MZM

    No: http://www.applelust.com/alust/terminal/archives/terminal041202.shtml
    work on the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) in the 1970’s was based on code originally from AT&T. In fact, all BSD source distributions up through 4.3BSD-Tahoe required the user to also purchase a source license from AT&T because a significant portion of the BSD source came directly from AT&T UNIX. This additional cost became prohibitively expensive for vendors wanting to use the BSD-derived, TCP/IP networking code for the PC market. These vendors requested that Berkeley break out this “BSD-only” code and provide it as a separate product. This “wholly-BSD” product was released as Network Release 1 in 1989, and it became an instant success. Work began soon thereafter to rewrite the AT&T portions of the rest of the 4.3BSD code to produce a feature-complete, BSD operating system without the costly licensing constraints imposed by AT&T.
    Network Release 2, the fruit of this labor, was released in June 1991. The source code in this release was entirely based on Berkeley code and could be downloaded without an expensive AT&T license. Unfortunately, the Network Release 2 was not completely functional since it lacked six files that did need the AT&T license. It was the intent of the software engineers at Berkeley to rewrite these six files, but these files proved too complicated to rewrite in a timely fashion. It would be six more months until William Jolitz had finished replacement files for these six AT&T files. Very soon thereafter he posted a fully compilable and bootable system for personal computers built with the Intel 386 CPU. This release was the first of the 386BSD distribution. It was available for free download, and within a short time a large number of users around the world were using it. With such a large number of installed users, the daunting task of maintaining and enhancing 386BSD became increasingly difficult to do for a person with a full time, “real” job. Others soon took up the mantel and over the next several years, five interrelated BSD-based distributions were spawned each generally focusing different goals: BSDI, NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and finally Darwin/Mac OS X.

    Atbildēt

Ieraksti komentāru

Tava e-pasta adrese netiks publicēta.