TUHS

tuhs@tuhs.org

47 participants
6503 discussions

by Andru Luvisi

I am having difficulty installing SysIII on simh. I have attached my simh pdp11 ini file (sys3.simh.bootstrap) and the Perl script used to create the install tape (mksys3tap.pl). Everything seems to go fine while installing the miniroot, but when I try to boot from the "installed" system I don't get very far. Below is a transcript. Any ideas? Andru $ pdp11 sys3.simh.bootstrap PDP-11 simulator V2.10-3 RL: creating new file Create bad block table on last track? [N] UNIX tape boot loader UNIX -- Initial Load: Tape-to-Disk The type of disk drive on which the Root file system will reside, as well as the type of tape drive that will be used for Tape 1 must be specified below. Answer the questions with a 'y' or 'n' followed by a carriage return or line feed. There is no type-ahead -- wait for the question to complete. The character '@' will kill the entire line, while the character '#' will erase the last character typed. RP03 at address 176710?: n RP04/5/6 at address 176700?: n RL01 at address 174400?: y Drive number (0-3)?: 0 Disk drive 0 selected. Mount a formatted pack on drive 0. Ready?: y TU10/TM11 at address 172520?: y Drive number (0-7)?: 0 Tape drive 0 selected. The tape on drive 0 will be read from the current position at 800bpi, 5120 characters (10 blocks) per record, and written onto the pack on drive 0 starting at block 0. Ready?: y Size of filesystem to be copied is 6000 blocks. What is the pack volume label? (e.g. p0001): The pack will be labelled p0001. The boot block for your type of disk drive will now be installed. The file system copy is now complete. To boot the basic unix for your disk and tape drives as indicated above, mount this pack on drive 0 and read in the boot block (block 0) using whatever means you have available; see romboot(8), 70boot(8). Then boot the program unixrltm using diskboot(8). Normally: #0=unixrltm The system will initially come up single-user; see init(8). If you have an upper case only console terminal, you must execute: stty lcase; see stty(1). After UNIX is up, link the file unixrltm to unix using ln(1). # ln /unixrltm /unix Set the date(1). Good Luck! The tape will now be rewound. HALT instruction, PC: 002460 (BR 2456) sim> boot rl0 #0=unixrltm ka6 = 1512 aps = 141774 pc = 1476 ps = 30010 trap type 0 ka6 = 1512 aps = 141666 pc = 113444 ps = 30300 trap type 0 panic: trap

21 years, 11 months

Re: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh?

by zmkm zmkm

Andu wouldn't be easier to load it through dsk (I mean download the complete tar and make a dsk out of it) . zmkm >From: Andru Luvisi <luvisi(a)andru.sonoma.edu> >Reply-To: Andru Luvisi <luvisi(a)andru.sonoma.edu> >To: tuhs(a)tuhs.org >Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh? >Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:36:48 -0700 (PDT) > >I am having difficulty installing SysIII on simh. I have attached my simh >pdp11 ini file (sys3.simh.bootstrap) and the Perl script used to create >the install tape (mksys3tap.pl). Everything seems to go fine while >installing the miniroot, but when I try to boot from the "installed" >system I don't get very far. Below is a transcript. Any ideas? > >Andru > > >$ pdp11 sys3.simh.bootstrap > >PDP-11 simulator V2.10-3 >RL: creating new file >Create bad block table on last track? [N] >UNIX tape boot loader >UNIX -- Initial Load: Tape-to-Disk > >The type of disk drive on which the Root file system will reside, >as well as the type of tape drive that will be used for Tape 1 >must be specified below. > >Answer the questions with a 'y' or 'n' followed by >a carriage return or line feed. >There is no type-ahead -- wait for the question to complete. >The character '@' will kill the entire line, >while the character '#' will erase the last character typed. > >RP03 at address 176710?: n >RP04/5/6 at address 176700?: n >RL01 at address 174400?: y >Drive number (0-3)?: 0 >Disk drive 0 selected. > >Mount a formatted pack on drive 0. >Ready?: y > >TU10/TM11 at address 172520?: y >Drive number (0-7)?: 0 >Tape drive 0 selected. > >The tape on drive 0 will be read from the current position >at 800bpi, 5120 characters (10 blocks) per record, >and written onto the pack on drive 0 starting at block 0. > >Ready?: y >Size of filesystem to be copied is 6000 blocks. >What is the pack volume label? (e.g. p0001): >The pack will be labelled p0001. >The boot block for your type of disk drive will now be installed. > >The file system copy is now complete. > >To boot the basic unix for your disk and tape drives >as indicated above, mount this pack on drive 0 >and read in the boot block (block 0) using >whatever means you have available; see romboot(8), 70boot(8). > >Then boot the program unixrltm using diskboot(8). >Normally: #0=unixrltm > >The system will initially come up single-user; see init(8). >If you have an upper case only console terminal, >you must execute: stty lcase; see stty(1). > >After UNIX is up, link the file unixrltm to unix using ln(1). > # ln /unixrltm /unix > >Set the date(1). > >Good Luck! > >The tape will now be rewound. > > >HALT instruction, PC: 002460 (BR 2456) >sim> boot rl0 >#0=unixrltm >ka6 = 1512 >aps = 141774 >pc = 1476 ps = 30010 >trap type 0 >ka6 = 1512 >aps = 141666 >pc = 113444 ps = 30300 >trap type 0 >panic: trap > ><< sys3.simh.bootstrap >> ><< mksys3tap.pl >> >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS(a)minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

21 years, 11 months

SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page

by Kenneth Stailey

http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com

21 years, 11 months

Re: [TUHS] What about the license from Jan 23, 2002?

by norman＠nose.cs.utoronto.ca

Just to clarify, what Brantley has is his own copy of the Bill Broderick letter, printed from the PDF file. If it's valid, it is effectively unrevokable anyway as it grants permission to use and distribute freely to anyone as long as credit to Caldera is maintained. But as long as nobody has a signed original it may be messy to prove that it's valid. On the other hand, I assume that if it can be shown that Caldera were aware of the letter and behaved as if it were valid, there are no secrets left to protect in V7 or 32/V. On the other leg, however, that letter doesn't open up System III. Norman Wilson Toronto ON

21 years, 11 months

What about the license from Jan 23, 2002?

by bwc＠coraid.com

I've got a sheet of paper here that is a license from Caldera dated January 23, 2002. Isn't that the current license? I don't see any timer limit on the license. Brantley

21 years, 11 months

Re: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux

by Carl Lowenstein

> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 08:46:27 +0930 > From: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog(a)lemis.com> > To: zmkm zmkm <new_zmkm(a)hotmail.com> > Content-Disposition: inline > > On Thursday, 12 June 2003 at 11:31:52 +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote: > > > > Good old dear BSD , where is it ?? still fighting a niche turf , why > > it didn?t burst in the open ? > > Glad you asked. It was the victim of a law suit ten years ago. Don't > underestimate what the current legal challenges can do to Linux. > > Greg In case you are referring to the BSD vs. AT&T suit, BSD won. carl

21 years, 11 months

Re: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation

by zmkm zmkm

Hi all what about eVAX ??? , any one tried this ? is it any good ?? Akito I don't know if you got my earlier email it was bounced back earlier today from TUHS any way v32 doesn't support virtual memory. zmkm >From: Kenneth Stailey <kstailey(a)yahoo.com> >To: Akito Fujita <akito_fujita(a)mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>, tuhs(a)tuhs.org >CC: Akito Fujita <akito_fujita(a)mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> >Subject: Re: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation >Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:26:26 -0700 (PDT) > > >--- Akito Fujita <akito_fujita(a)mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> wrote: > > Hi > > > > I have a plan to run UNIX/32V using SIMH. > > > > UNIX/32V is required VAX-11/780 > > and SIMH support Micro VAX III (?) only. > > Is it possible without any modification ? > >VAX-11/780 is a unibus VAX. >Micro VAX III / SIMH VAX is a Qbus VAX. > >http://world.std.com/~bdc/projects/vaxen/vax-perf.html > >SIMH is "Mayfair III" on that page. > > > Does anyone try this ? > > Are there more better emulator than SIMH ? > > or Should I add the feature of 11/780 emulation into SIHM ? > > > > Thanks > > > > > > - Akito > > > > _______________________________________________ > > TUHS mailing list > > TUHS(a)minnie.tuhs.org > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! >http://sbc.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS(a)minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

21 years, 11 months

VAX-11/780 emulation

by Akito Fujita

Hi I have a plan to run UNIX/32V using SIMH. UNIX/32V is required VAX-11/780 and SIMH support Micro VAX III (?) only. Is it possible without any modification ? Does anyone try this ? Are there more better emulator than SIMH ? or Should I add the feature of 11/780 emulation into SIHM ? Thanks - Akito

21 years, 11 months

I knew that penguin couldn't be trusted

by Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai

If you believe Mr Sontag's words of course. I sincerely wonder what kind of medication the guy is using. http://www.byte.com/documents/s=8276/byt1055784622054/0616_marshall.html Best part: At this point I started to think about the public interest and about restrictive monopolies laws. It was almost as though Sontag was reading my mind.and yes, SCO has that base covered too. I listened to how IBM has bypassed U.S. export controls with Linux. How "Syria and Libya and North Korea" are all building supercomputers with Linux and inexpensive Intel hardware, in violation of U.S. export control laws. These laws would normally restrict export of technologies such as JFS, NUMA, RCU, and SMP.and, (I was waiting for this) "encryption technologies." "We know that is occurring in Syria," I heard, even though my mind was fogging over at this point. "So are you saying that the U.S. government might file a "Friend of the Court Brief" to support your case against IBM?" I blurted out. "Don't be surprised" was Sontag's answer. -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / a capoeirista PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B http://www.tendra.org/ | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/ Is there a place deep within, a place where you hide your darkest Sins..?

21 years, 11 months

Re: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux

by zmkm zmkm

Michael I dont agree with you on this , your complain about linux is unfair , on the contrary to many unixers especially the new generation of hackers and new unix users even those users fed up with Microsoft gimmicks , linux was miracle touch that helped to re energize the otherwise stale unix market , simply look at the market today which operating system has grown beyond any expectations ? . Another thing , in the days of corporate greed and bullying a-la-microsoft way, linux played a significant role to cement the open source movement. Good old dear BSD , where is it ?? still fighting a niche turf , why it didnt burst in the open ? , its troubles doesnt have anything to do with linux its been there way before linux surfaced. I will not go into this flame war which is better BSD or Linux because both are dear to me and each has its own strong points and weaknesses . Finally , this whole nonsense from SCO wouldn't be there if SCO had any good products to offer or enjoying good revenue , so this law suite shows how desperate SCO is sinking in the red and using this law suite to float itself again . Love it or hate it linux is here to stay J . _______________ preparing for eventual flame war , automatic sprinkler = check fire extinguishers = check fire fighting water hose = check fire proof suite and helmet = check all systems go . zmkm >From: msokolov(a)ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov) >To: tuhs(a)tuhs.org >Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux >Date: Tue, 10 Jun 03 14:01:08 PDT > >Here is my response to SCO vs. Linux. The thing is, some of the things they >are >saying I agree with most emphatically, except that what those things really >support is not SCO but our TUHS cause. Their main line, at least as I >interpret >it, is that UNIX is the real OS, UNIX is better than Linux, and Linux is >just a >naughty child that is becoming more and more of a nuisance to the adults. I >agree wholeheartedly! I and many other UNIX bigots have been more vocal >about >this than SCO. > >BUT... UNIX is not what SCO means by this term, UNIX is V7 -> 4BSD! That is >the >real UNIX, USG is just a bad commercialized branch that no one ever really >liked anyway! So to all those Fortune 1000 (or whatever that was) companies >warned by SCO to stop running Linux, they should throw out those cheap >micros, >put all their old large VAXen back online, and run True UNIX, 4.3 BSD UNIX! >And >that *is* real UNIX, it comes directly from V7 and openly and proudly >admits to >this fact! Isn't an OS that openly and proudly admits to come directly from >Holy UNIX better than a cheap UNIX copycat that needs to be sued in court >to >determine what the hell it really is? > >But SCO probably won't be too happy about it as they just gave away the >True >UNIX (V7) to the World for free, and it's non-retractable. > >So if anything good comes out of this lawsuit it's that maybe, just maybe, >BSD >will finally get some attention and use over Linux. The Free Computing >community doesn't have to suffer any loss whatsoever if SCO wins, we can >instead just switch from Linux to the much better True UNIX, which is just >as >free but a lot more solid, mature, and True. And stick it to SCO and laugh >diabolically at how they voluntarily made UNIX free without us having to >seize >it by force in a revolution. > >MS (donning the flameproof spacesuit) >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS(a)minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

21 years, 11 months

[TUHS] Pirates Of Penguinance (Apologies to Gilbert, Sullivan, and most of humanity)

by Kenneth Stailey

http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/PiratesOfPenguinance __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com

21 years, 11 months

Re: Your message to TUHS awaits moderator approval

by Jim Capp

Hmmm, I thought I *was* a member ... is it possible I am a member as jcapp(a)kp.net? or jcapp(a)acm.org? Do I need to submit under another address or am I missing the boat? Thanks, Jim On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 11:32:44PM +1000, tuhs-bounces(a)minnie.tuhs.org wrote: > Your mail to 'TUHS' with the subject > > Another response to SCO vs. Linux > > Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval. > > The reason it is being held: > > Post by non-member to a members-only list > > Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive > notification of the moderator's decision. If you would like to cancel > this posting, please visit the following URL: > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/confirm/tuhs/de9265d7287d853c78061cb586498f9…

21 years, 11 months

Another response to SCO vs. Linux

by Jim Capp

Hi All, I have been an avid UNIX fan since 1983 when I read my first UNIX manual and realized the power and flexibility of the command line utilities and portability of the C compiler. I have used many flavors of *NIX and the companies I worked for sold a lot of SCO products. However, it became increasingly annoying to have to spend an extra $1,000 to get a C compiler. Beginning in 1994, we began replacing AT&T Unix, SCO Xenix, and SCO Unix with Linux. The final straw for us using SCO was when a major client upgraded their system from a 2-CPU NCR to a 4-CPU Gateway and it took us hours to locate all the necessary drivers to make it fly. Then afterwards, the client could not find their license materials. Just for fun, we popped in a RH7.1 version of Linux and it booted fine, located all the hardware and installed itself in about a half-hour. It has been running that way for the last two years. We had another client simply upgrade their SCO Unix system from a Pentium-100 to a Pentium III. After spending hours trying to move their SCO license and finding out that the bootloaders didn't like *something* (unknown to this day) we went back to the customer and suggested another path. Today, that system is running Linux/Apache/PHP/PostgreSQL. The bottom line is that Linux works well. The fact that it is nearly free (cost of media/downloads/time etc.) is a nice bonus. IMHO, SCO is a victim of their own design (who would symbolically link 1,000 files to some strange /opt/SCO/.../.../etc/init.d/....??? I guess when your business models don't pan out, you can always sue somebody ... especially when someone like Microsoft gives you the money. Do you really think Microsoft would pay $10,000,000 to anyone else without a fight and without trying every other business tactic that they have used in the past? Finally, to threaten pulling IBM's AIX license unless they "settle" is hubris. My only fear is that a judge might think 80 out of 2.5 million lines of code has some significant value :-/ I sincerely hope the dialogue of practical arguments against SCO that I have seen in this list make it to the right people in defense of IBM. Sincerely, Jim Capp

21 years, 11 months

Re: SCO vs IBM: what unix patents?

by Dennis Ritchie

Arnold asked, > Just out of curiousity, what patents are there in the current Unix System V > system? The setuid patent was released to the public, so that can't be > an issue. And copyright, trade secrets, blah blah, I can understand. But > I'm curious what is there in System V that has actually been patented? One article I read mentioned three, all visible in the USPTO database: 5,652,854 (filed 1995, granted 1997, assigned to Novell) 5,265,250 (filed 1990, granted 1993, originally assigned to AT&T) 6,097,384 (filed 1995, granted 2000, assigned to Novell) The first has to do with page table mapping and virtual address space, the second with RPC, the third with managing memory in subobjects. I have no idea how central these are to the case. They appear rather peripheral to me. Dennis

21 years, 11 months

The Open Group vs. SCO

by Kenneth Stailey

http://www.opengroup.org/ Who Owns UNIX�? You may have seen recent press articles announcing that SCO is the owner of UNIX or has licensed UNIX to Microsoft. Such statements are inaccurate, misleading and cause considerable confusion. The Open Group has owned the registered trademark UNIX since 1994. Here http://www.opengroup.org/comm/press/who-owns-unix.htm is what we said in response to a Linux Weekly News article last week. Also available is a backgrounder http://www.opengroup.org/comm/press/unix-backgrounder.htm that explains the history and reasons why The Open Group takes action on trademark misuse. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com

21 years, 11 months

This is too weird

by Kenneth Stailey

http://www.sco.com/scosource/ Way to weird: http://www.sco.com/scosource/linuxqanda.html Q: What is SVR6? A: SVR6 is the code name for the next-generation operating platform designed to take advantage of Web services and is the foundation of our SCOx strategy. As the owners of the UNIX operating system, it is incumbent upon SCO to advance the UNIX kernel for both 32-bit and 64-bit architectures. This will be accomplished through the support of key industry partners who will also contribute to this next-generation platform. SVR6 will be formally announced at our upcoming SCO Forum event to be held in Las Vegas, Nevada on August 17-19 at the MGM Grand Hotel. It just keeps getting weirder: http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com

21 years, 11 months

SCO to have violated GPL?

by Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai

As seen on Slashdot: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1123176,00.asp Some members of the open-source community are claiming that the SCO Group may have violated the terms of the GNU GPL (General Public License) by incorporating source code from the Linux kernel into the Linux Kernel Personality feature found in SCO Unix without giving the changes back to the community or displaying copyright notices attributing the code to Linux. A source close to SCO, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told eWEEK that parts of the Linux kernel code were copied into the Unix System V source tree by former or current SCO employees. That could violate the conditions of the GNU GPL, which states that any amendments to open-source code used in a commercial product must be given back to the community or a copyright notice must be displayed attributable to Linux, he said. The source, who has seen both the Unix System V source code and the Linux source code and who assisted with a SCO project to bring the two kernels closer together, said that SCO "basically re-implemented the Linux kernel with functions available in the Unix kernel to build what is now known as the Linux Kernel Personality (LKP) in SCO Unix." The LKP is a feature that allows users to run standard Linux applications along with standard Unix applications on a single system using the UnixWare kernel. "During that project we often came across sections of code that looked very similar, in fact we wondered why even variable names were identical. It looked very much like both codes had the same origin, but that was good as the implementation of 95 percent of all Linux system calls on the Unix kernel turned out to be literally 'one-liners'," the source said. Only a handful of system calls.socketcall, ipc and clone.were fairly difficult to implement as they involved the obvious differentiators between Linux and Unix: networking, inter-process communication and kernel threads, the source said. -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / a capoeirista PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B http://www.tendra.org/ | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/ I am the impossibility...

21 years, 11 months

SCO vs IBM: what unix patents?

by Aharon Robbins

Just out of curiousity, what patents are there in the current Unix System V system? The setuid patent was released to the public, so that can't be an issue. And copyright, trade secrets, blah blah, I can understand. But I'm curious what is there in System V that has actually been patented? Thanks, Arnold

21 years, 11 months

My response to SCO vs. Linux

by msokolov＠ivan.Harhan.ORG

Here is my response to SCO vs. Linux. The thing is, some of the things they are saying I agree with most emphatically, except that what those things really support is not SCO but our TUHS cause. Their main line, at least as I interpret it, is that UNIX is the real OS, UNIX is better than Linux, and Linux is just a naughty child that is becoming more and more of a nuisance to the adults. I agree wholeheartedly! I and many other UNIX bigots have been more vocal about this than SCO. BUT... UNIX is not what SCO means by this term, UNIX is V7 -> 4BSD! That is the real UNIX, USG is just a bad commercialized branch that no one ever really liked anyway! So to all those Fortune 1000 (or whatever that was) companies warned by SCO to stop running Linux, they should throw out those cheap micros, put all their old large VAXen back online, and run True UNIX, 4.3 BSD UNIX! And that *is* real UNIX, it comes directly from V7 and openly and proudly admits to this fact! Isn't an OS that openly and proudly admits to come directly from Holy UNIX better than a cheap UNIX copycat that needs to be sued in court to determine what the hell it really is? But SCO probably won't be too happy about it as they just gave away the True UNIX (V7) to the World for free, and it's non-retractable. So if anything good comes out of this lawsuit it's that maybe, just maybe, BSD will finally get some attention and use over Linux. The Free Computing community doesn't have to suffer any loss whatsoever if SCO wins, we can instead just switch from Linux to the much better True UNIX, which is just as free but a lot more solid, mature, and True. And stick it to SCO and laugh diabolically at how they voluntarily made UNIX free without us having to seize it by force in a revolution. MS (donning the flameproof spacesuit)

21 years, 11 months

one person comments on his attorney's take on the SCO NDA

by Kenneth Stailey

http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3752 In a nutshell the SCO NDA is a gag, a muzzle. It restricts you to only being able to say "yes there is common code" or "no there is no common code", nothing else may be said by you without violating the NDA. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com

21 years, 11 months

Re: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate

by zmkm zmkm

Looks like sco has learned a lot from its cozying up with microsoft that is instead of meeting market challenges with better technology and competitive pricing against its competitors it resorts to the lowest form bullying marketing gimmicks and legal arm twisting just like microsoft style , so now they look like shooting themselves in the foot , good ! let's hope they shoot both feet !. >From: Kenneth Stailey <kstailey(a)yahoo.com> >To: tuhs(a)tuhs.org >Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate >Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 19:32:55 -0700 (PDT) > >Two words: "version control". > >If the code that SCO purports is copied into Linux is known the version >control >archives will say who inserted it. It will be very easy to prove if >Caldera >inserted the code themselves. > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). >http://calendar.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS(a)minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

21 years, 11 months

Re: Re: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate

by Norman Wilson

Kenneth Stailey: Two words: "version control". If the code that SCO purports is copied into Linux is known the version control archives will say who inserted it. It will be very easy to prove if Caldera inserted the code themselves. Alas, two more words: "read-write storage." Version control info is stored in a file; how do we know (as SCalderaO might argue) that some hacker hasn't edited it after the fact to pretend something was put in by Caldera, or that they just lied about it to begin with? Version control data might be a useful, but I suspect only as a trail to specific people whose could then offer personal testimony about the history of a particular piece of code. The testimony would be harder to impeach than the code. Even a read-only copy of the version control info, e.g. a CD-ROM, isn't a lot more solid; some hard evidence would be needed of when that CD-ROM was written, beyond the easily-forged timestamps on the disc itself, and there could still be a claim that someone just lied when writing it, especially if there is a claim that malice was involved. So it still would probably come down to personal testimony. The usual disclaimer applies: I'm no lawyer. I'm just trying to think of counter-arguments, both those reasonable in abstract and those that seem to fit within the spirit of the complaint against IBM. Norman Wilson Toronto ON

21 years, 11 months

IBM doesn't intend to respond to SCO's threat

by Kenneth Stailey

http://www.eetimes.com/sys/news/OEG20030606S0039 Linux-Unix ties spelled out By Charles J. Murray EE Times June 6, 2003 (5:08 p.m. ET) PARK RIDGE, Ill. � SCO Group revealed the foundation of its legal battle with the Linux community, when it rolled out evidence of large blocks of Linux code that it contends were stolen from Unix. Analysts who saw the samples of the allegedly stolen code said the evidence is damaging and that SCO Group has a formidable legal case. �If everything SCO showed me today is true, then the Linux community should be very concerned,� said Bill Claybrook, research director for Linux and open-source software at the Aberdeen Group (Boston). If SCO (Lindon, Utah) prevails in its legal efforts, many observers believe the action could, at best, result in hundreds of multimillion-dollar licensing payments from Fortune 1000 companies and, at worst, damage the foundation of open-source software. The revelations by the SCO Group Wednesday (June 4) followed a turbulent week in which the company exchanged both allegations and counterallegations with Linux supporters and with Novell Inc. (Provo, Utah), which has proclaimed in an open letter that SCO doesn't own the copyrights and patents to Unix, the operating system Novell sold to SCO in 1995. SCO's revelations also served as a response to the Linux community, which has complained over the past two months that it doubted SCO's contentions of theft because the company had not publicly disclosed evidence to support its claims. Claybrook and another analyst who had been given an opportunity to see examples of the alleged theft said the blocks of Unix and Linux were strikingly similar. The two blocks of software, they said, contained as many as 80 lines of identical code, along with identical developers' comments. �One could argue that developers could write exact or very similar code, but the developers' comments in the code are basically your DNA, or fingerprints, for a particular piece of source code,� said Laura DiDio, a senior analyst with the Yankee Group (Boston), who viewed the evidence. �It's very unlikely that code and comments could be identical by pure chance,� Claybrook said. DiDio and Claybrook said they were given side-by-side copies of Unix and Linux code to compare. Neither was paid for the work, and both agreed that the evidence suggests SCO has a strong case in its $1 billion suit against IBM Corp. and in its scrap with the Linux community. Linux supporters, however, were quick to question the meaning of the evidence. �Can SCO prove that this code came from SCO to Linux, and not from Linux to SCO?� asked Jon �Maddog� Hall, executive director of Linux International (Nashua, N.H.), a Linux advocacy organization. �Or did the code that's in SCO Unix come from a third source? Show me the facts,� he said. SCO's battle with the open-source community grabbed headlines two months ago when it filed a $1 billion lawsuit in the state court of Utah against IBM, alleging misappropriation of trade secrets and unfair competition in the Linux market. In May, on the heels of that suit, SCO sent letters to Fortune 1,000 companies and 500 other businesses advising them to seek legal counsel if they use Linux. SCO's actions angered Linux supporters, who allegedly deluged the company with angry e-mails, threatened drive-by shootings, and posted SCO's executives' home phone numbers and addresses on Web sites. On May 28, Novell jumped into the fray, arguing that it never sold the Unix copyrights or patents to SCO when it consummated the Unix sale in 1995. In an open letter to SCO, Novell said, �Apparently you share this view, since over the last few months you have repeatedly asked Novell to transfer the copyrights to SCO, requests Novell has rejected.� Novell assailed In a subsequent news conference on May 30, SCO chief executive officer Darl McBride lashed out at Novell, restating SCO's claim that it owns the Unix operating system patents and implying that Novell has a hidden agenda for insisting otherwise. �We strongly disagree with Novell's position and view it as a desperate measure to curry favor with the Linux community,� McBride said. Last week's analyst revelations, however, cast the battle in a new light. Until the analysts weighed in, Linux backers had relied on the defense that no one had seen proof of the allegations. Most said they didn't understand why SCO had refused to release the alleged infringements for public scrutiny. Some said they viewed SCO's actions as a means to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt about open-source software. But analysts categorically disagreed with that viewpoint last week. �SCO is not trying to destroy Linux,� said DiDio of the Yankee Group. �That's silly. This is about paying royalties.� SCO contends that by co-opting code from Unix, Linux has severely damaged SCO's intellectual property. According to some estimates, the company collected annual revenue of between $200 million and $250 million on Unix System 5 (sic) software before the rise of Linux. After Linux reached the mainstream, those revenue figures dropped to about $60 million a year. Because it believes Linux incorporates code that's been �stolen� from Unix, it has warned hundreds of companies to stop using Linux or start paying royalties. �SCO's words were that Linux distributors and others who are using Linux are 'distributing stolen goods,' � said Claybrook of Aberdeen Group. Some companies, such as Sun Microsystems Inc., already pay hefty royalties to SCO for Unix. Two weeks ago, Microsoft Corp. joined that group when it agreed to pay royalties that were said to be �significantly in excess of $10 million,� one source said. Microsoft declined to comment on the details. Facing a choice Many observers believe SCO's case is bolstered by the fact that it is represented by high-powered attorney David Boies, who prosecuted the Microsoft antitrust case and represented Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election vote-counting scandal. Analysts said IBM will be the first company to face a choice in the legal matter. �If IBM wants to cure this problem, they could start by buying all the appropriate licenses and then paying SCO a billion dollars,� Claybrook said. �But SCO now says that a billion may not be enough to cover their damages.� Users of Linux also face a decision about whether to ignore SCO's letters or pay for a license. Analysts said companies may face that decision as soon as June 13, the date on which SCO has threatened to terminate its existing Unix contracts with IBM. Intellectual-property attorneys advise that companies that received a letter from SCO first determine whether IBM is indemnifying them, as users, against legal action. IBM, for its part, has said it doesn't intend to respond to SCO's threat. �We believe our contact is perpetual and irrevocable,� an IBM spokeswoman said. �We've already paid for it, and there is nothing else we need to do.� Whether the legal actions will harm Linux in the long run is still open to question, experts said. The Linux community, unconvinced by SCO's actions, says it is still waiting for more solid proof that SCO really has a case. Most say that showing the alleged violations to a few analysts who sign nondisclosure agreements isn't enough. �We still don't see the need for secrecy,� said Hall of Linux International. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com

21 years, 11 months

Re: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate

by Aharon Robbins

What I find fascinating (and that no-one has mentioned yet) is how anyone can claim that Unix internals are still trade secret, especially given this book: The Design of the UNIX Operating System, Maurice J. Bach. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1986. ISBN 0-13-201799-7. There's also these: The Magic Garden Explained: The Internals of Unix System V Release 4: An Open Systems Design, Berny Goodheart, James Cox, John R. Mashey. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1994. ISBN 0-13-098138-9. Unix Internals: The New Frontiers, Uresh Vahalia. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1996. ISBN 0-13-101908-2. According to Amazon.com, a new edition is scheduled for 2005. The Bach book, in particular, is a rather large smoking gun that AT&T didn't care a huge amount about trade secrets. The book is still in print (and selling for a whopping $69.97 on Amazon.com!) It doesn't contain actual source code, but let's get real here... Arnold

21 years, 11 months

Re: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate

by Aharon Robbins

> add on the lion book Yes, that's been officially published, as well as in N-th generation photo copies. But the books I cited are for System V, including SVR4, which is much more relevant for the issue under discussion... Pfui. What a mess this whole business is. Arnold

21 years, 11 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

TUHS