LinuxSA Mailing list archives

  From: Kim Hawtin <khawtin@ratbaggames.com>
  To  : Richard Sharpe <rsharpe@richardsharpe.com>
  Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 12:31:39 +1030

Re: More SCO news

Richard Sharpe wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Kim Hawtin wrote:
>>Richard Sharpe wrote:
>>>On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Kim Hawtin wrote:
>>>>SCO's Letter and the Files;
>>>> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20031222161942627
>>>>
>>>>So we start to see the begining of what SCO are up to.
>>>>They have always been complaining about ABIs in various
>>>>other free or opensourec unicies...
>>>>
>>>>SCO clamin that these APIs were used without their
>>>>permisson.
>>>
>>>My understanding is that an ABI or API cannot have a copyright placed over 
>>>it, but that the text that expresses these ideas can.
>>
>>If these APIs, specifically in Linux were derived from published
>>texts, is this still valid? (I don't know which is why I'm asking)
>
> The APIs were described in may open sources, especially standards docs 
> where the idea was that they be implemented. 

Ok.

> As for the ABIs, I guess it would depend on what an individual judge 
> decides, however, I believe that most of the information was made public 
> by parties like Intel as, I think Linux says.

What makes an ABI? how is it really different to an API in the case of
something like;

from "include/linux/stat.h";

#include <asm/stat.h>

#endif

#if defined(__KERNEL__) || !defined(__GLIBC__) || (__GLIBC__ < 2)

#define S_IFMT  00170000
#define S_IFSOCK 0140000
#define S_IFLNK  0120000
#define S_IFREG  0100000
#define S_IFBLK  0060000
#define S_IFDIR  0040000
#define S_IFCHR  0020000
#define S_IFIFO  0010000
#define S_ISUID  0004000
#define S_ISGID  0002000
#define S_ISVTX  0001000

...

>>The reason I'm asking these questions, is that I'm considering a move
>>to either FreeBSD or NetBSD. I'm responsible for the deployment of
>>the servers at my work place and need to make an informed decision.
> 
> While I think that FreeBSD has a lot to say for it, the question you 
> probably have to ask is how much support will you find out there for 
> FreeBSD as apposed to Linux.

I have quite a bit of experience with FreeBSD.
I have no problems with supporing it for my employer.
Its more an issue of hardware support =) as always...

>>But the way I read that article, all of the Open Source BSDs are
>>also vulnerable to this claim... if not, why not?
> 
> Because of the agreement between AT&T/USL and UCB. I don't think SCO wants 
> to open that can of worms, because I think it will show that all the code 
> had been disclosed to sufficient people that any trade secrets etc had 
> been lost.

Would the APIs/ABIs have not been made available early enough in the
Linux kernel to predate this court case?

>>>>Are SCOs claims actually fair?
>>
>>I noticed you stayed away from this one =)
> 
> I just didn't notice it. I agree with Mark. I think Linus' response shows 
> that SCO have stepped in it again.

=)

cheers,

Kim Hawtin
-- 
IT Systems Administrator
Ratbag
Level 8, 63 Pirie Street,
Adelaide SA 5000,
Australia
Ph +61 8 8223 5830, Fax +61 8 8223 5746
email: khawtin@ratbaggames.com
http://www.ratbaggames.com


-- 
LinuxSA WWW: http://www.linuxsa.org.au/ IRC: #linuxsa on irc.freenode.net
To unsubscribe from the LinuxSA list:
  mail linuxsa-request@linuxsa.org.au with "unsubscribe" as the subject