I went to one of the SCO forum events at Santa Cruz at the time and I vaguely remember someone having a chat to use and saying that the dispute was that SCO and IBM were working on project Monterey and some of the SCO SMP code found its way into Linux.

At the time SCO felt that Linux was several years behind on SMP so getting the SMP code would remove the SCO advantage at a time when processors were getting more cores. This may have been more to do with the IBM -vs- SCO contract case.

Regards, Rob.

On 8 Nov 2024, at 23:18, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:



---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
Date: Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 3:17 PM
Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO's "evidence" (was: RIP Darl McBride former CEO of SCO)
To: David Barto <barto@kdbarto.org>




On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 1:07 PM David Barto <barto@kdbarto.org> wrote:


On Nov 8, 2024, at 12:27 PM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:



On Fri, Nov 8, 2024, 6:20 AM Dan Cross <crossd@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 5, 2024 at 2:02 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2024 at 11:52 AM ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I keep wondering if this assertion of code difference or lack thereof can be tested. Are not all these sources available? Which bits are missing?
>
> Yes. Great question.
>
> https://people.freebsd.org/~imp/pmap/pmap.32v
> https://people.freebsd.org/~imp/pmap/pmap.4.2
> https://people.freebsd.org/~imp/pmap/pmap.4.3
> https://people.freebsd.org/~imp/pmap/pmap.net.2

Hmm; these all 404 for me?

 Doh! Too much muscle memory. Those should all be bmap:


Not sure why the previous...

Warner