Slashdot Mirror


Linus Torvalds about SCO, IP, MS and Transmeta

strmcrw writes " San Jose Mercury News has an interview with Linus. He talks about about SCO vs IBM and gives his opinion on Microsoft. He also shed light on his decision to leave chip maker Transmeta for a Linux corporate software consortium, the Open Source Development Lab."

92 of 431 comments (clear)

  1. Slashdot Beatitudes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    And seeing the multitudes, He went up unto the mountain: and when He was set, his disciples came unto him: And He opened his mouth, and taught them, saying,

    "Blessed are the poor in threshold: for theirs is the Kingdom of the Page-Lengthening and Page-Widening Posts.

    "Blessed are they that mourn the death of *BSD: for they shall be comforted with an ultradense Linux server from VA Linux, now sold by California Digital Corporation.

    "Blessed are the posters of smug one-liners: for they shall inherit an Account Capped at 50.

    "Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after The First Post: for they shall have the Third or Fourth Post.

    "Blessed are the karma whores: for they shall obtain "Score: 5, Insightful".

    "Blessed are those who dismiss out-of-hand: for they shall fail to see the Point of the Original Post.

    "Blessed are those who seek to associate themselves with the latest techno-fad: for they shall be called 3L33T for at least Another Half Hour.

    "Blessed are they which are persecuted for their own self-righteousness' sake: for theirs is the Kingdom of "Ask Slashdot".

    "Blessed are the over-eager, who believe that Open Source is a social movement heralding the rise of a new generation: for they shall not realize that There Are No Sacred Cows.

    "Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for the sake of your Favorite Operating System.

    "Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in Heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

    THIS IS THE WORD OF THE LORD

    1. Re: Slashdot Beatitudes by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2, Funny


      > "Blessed are those who seek to associate themselves with the latest techno-fad: for they shall be called 3L33T for at least Another Half Hour.

      Andy would be jealous: that's twice what anyone has a right to expect.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re:Slashdot Beatitudes by raistphrk · · Score: 2, Funny

      Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after The First Post: for they shall have the Third or Fourth Post.

      Well, at least we know you subscribe to one point of your sermon.

      However, I believe you forgot several more:

      Blessed are they who submit stories, for their submission will be rehashed three days later.

      Blessed are the poor-spellers and grammatically challenged, for they be published for all to read and heckle.

      Blessed are they that actually read the article, their wit will smite the egos of slashdot editors.

      Blessed are the developers, thanks to them their formula for a daily toast-and-jam routine will be GPL'd and forked repeatedly, causing widespread debate and confrontation on the DTAJKML.

      Blessed are the fools who neglect to preview their posts, their karma shall remain lower than the latest kernel pre-version number.

    3. Re:Slashdot Beatitudes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
      I am not a Catholic/Christian and do not follow the regigion of Christianity but I must take you up on your post.

      Aha! Then you are admitting you are a terrorist!

    4. Re:Slashdot Beatitudes by Corpus_Callosum · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hah!

      The use of psychology and memetics to combat open source. This trend is growing... MSFT must be hiring...

      Don't be fooled by sigs such as: "Free as in working for IBM without getting paid", or biblical excerpts trying to associate deeply rooted beliefs to the hopelessness of open-source. These strategies are right out of psychology and memetic text-books...

      And, so is this whole SCO mess. It exists only to f*ck with us and attempt to slow us down and lower our spirits... There is no intention for them to go to court, only to drag it on as long as possible and associate ridiculous madness with open-source (perhaps also hoping the stumble on something that can stick). There is no other purpose.

      Just remember who has "billions" to loose... If you were billy, wouldn't you pay a few psych-geeks to play mind games??? Of course you would...

      --
      The reason that it can be true that 1+1 > 2 is that very peculiar nonzero value of the + operator
    5. Re:Slashdot Beatitudes by LittleBigLui · · Score: 2, Funny
      Blessed are they who submit stories, for their submission will be rehashed three days later.


      the only thing i can add to that is:

      Blessed are they who submit stories, for their submission will be rehashed three days later.
      --
      Free as in mason.
  2. heh by Graspee_Leemoor · · Score: 4, Funny

    From article:

    " Do you steal a car in the bright daylight with a lot of people around? Or do you steal a car, go for a joyride at 4 am in the morning when there aren't a lot of people around."

    I have visions of that scene from Groundhog day, except instead of Bill Murray and a groundhog driving it's Linus and a penguin...

    graspee

    1. Re:heh by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 3, Funny

      I have visions of that scene from Groundhog day, except instead of Bill Murray and a groundhog driving it's Linus and a penguin...

      Don't drive angry!!

  3. Famously outspoken? by Realistic_Dragon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I thought that he was mostly famous for saying 'whatever' and then just doing things his own way?

    Perhaps they are confusing him with RMS.

    --
    Beep beep.
  4. Good interview. by Sheetrock · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It's good to get Linux's opinions on the SCO suit. Too much attention has been given in the press to SCO's claims, which plays right into their hands. It's this type of thing that may bring Linux down, not technical issues.

    It's interesting how the interviewers always seem to go into the same thread of what makes Linux great. Given the history one would never have expected it to do as well as it has; like chopsticks, which were actually invented by immigrant restaurant owners in America's mining communities in the 1800s, Linux has picked up a myth of its own that actually covers the more interesting fact that it was simply a hobby with momentum. It's a bit wierd to think that such a thing has evolved to contend with and possibly displace software actually engineered for the enterprise.

    Can't wait for 2.6.

    --

    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
    -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




    1. Re:Good interview. by Syre · · Score: 4, Informative

      Uh... sorry. Chopsticks have been in use for well over 1000 years, and probably longer.

      Look here for some information about the history of chopsticks.

    2. Re:Good interview. by mfifer · · Score: 5, Informative
    3. Re: Good interview. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Funny


      > Uh... sorry. Chopsticks have been in use for well over 1000 years, and probably longer.

      Whereas we've only had 'forks' for the past 30...

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re: Good interview. by happyDave · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wow, you're informed. Dim, but informed. "Forks" as in forking of software versions, as in the history of Unix. Which dates to about 1970. 33 years. Original post was being funny.

    5. Re: Good interview. by bazmonkey · · Score: 2, Funny

      ::Sheepishly crawls back under rock to die of dimwittedness::

  5. Re:Their editors... by shadowjk · · Score: 3, Funny

    But not as bad as the nitpicks, who don't realize that "an" is not a typo.

  6. Linus the Unknown Comic by Nidhogg · · Score: 5, Funny

    I enjoyed that IBM started porting Linux to the S390, found that hugely amusing. I thought, OK, somebody has done a few too many drugs.

    Alright that made me laugh out loud. And confirmed the fact to the wife that I'm a geek because it did.

    Damn you Torvalds...

    1. Re:Linus the Unknown Comic by Tony-A · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Q: Competitively, do you think this controlled chaos works against a company like Microsoft?

      A: I think it ultimately the only way to do software. I have arguments why. The main one is the complexity issue. It's very hard for someone who doesn't work like this to keep control of an increasingly complex source base and increasingly complex user base. If you try to control the process too much, you can go straight to the end point where you want to go. That works well if you know where the end point is. If you don't know where it is and you can't control where people want to use your software, it's a very bad thing to have one branch that is very concentrated on one line of development. The best analogy is biological diversity."

      I don't know, but I suspect that IBM is on to something.

  7. The Linux "Operating System" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the article:

    Linus Torvalds is the creator of the Linux operating system, the open source version of Unix that is sweeping through the software world in a direct challenge to Microsoft.

    [Emphasis mine]


    From Rob's own http://cmdrtaco.net/ :

    What? You haven't heard of Linux? It's an operating system created by Linus Torvalds, and a band of hacks scattered accross the globe.

    [Emphasis mine]


    Sorry GNU/FSF/RMS. You're like Rodney Dangerfield; you never get respect...

    1. Re:The Linux "Operating System" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Apologies for responding to what some would consider a GNU/Linux troll...

      Doesn't nearly everyone who has heard of Linux know that the name refers to all the applications that come with a Linux distro, including the GNU apps?

      Referring to it as GNU/Linux gives the FSF more credit than they deserve. Sure they deserve a lot of credit, but there are many other things that go into a typical distro that deserve about as much credit, such as:

      RedHat's ext2/ext3 filesystem
      XFree86
      GNOME or KDE
      Mozilla
      OpenOffice.org
      Apache, PHP and MySQL or PostgreSQL

      Without any one of these very widely used technologies, using a typical Linux distro would be a lot less pleasant.

    2. Re:The Linux "Operating System" by garett_spencley · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OMG who really cares.

      It's like you're looking for something to bitch at. Seriously can you honestly blame people for not wanting to say:

      "Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux (an operating system kernel, which is the underlying interface to hardware devices and other system resources and not a complete package of applications/tools etc. that may or may not be GNU and copyrighted by the FSF) ...."

      This isn't a troll. I'm seriously a little tired of hearing from people complaining about the general public calling it Linux vs. GNU/Linux.

      Give credit where credit is due, but Linux is NOT GNU and GNU is NOT Linux. It's nitpicking to draw distinction between the kernel and the other applications which comprise the entire system. You don't need GNU for Linux and therefore the two are not mutually inclusive.

      Of course that is definitely not to undermine all the incredible work that the FSF and GNU project have done, but I mean as far as I'm concerned Linux is an operating system. It's a system that allows for the operation of a computer. Sure yout need an "/sbin/init" program to fire up some sort of user interface to the system, but that doesn't have to be GNU software. So I think if anyone is going to nitpick at anything it should be at distributions who pack GNU software with Linux and then only call it Linux. But complaining about a journalist referring to Linux as an operating system?

      - Garett

    3. Re:The Linux "Operating System" by McDutchie · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Referring to it as GNU/Linux gives the FSF more credit than they deserve. Sure they deserve a lot of credit, but there are many other things that go into a typical distro that deserve about as much credit, such as:

      RedHat's ext2/ext3 filesystem
      XFree86
      GNOME or KDE
      Mozilla
      OpenOffice.org
      Apache, PHP and MySQL or PostgreSQL

      You are missing the point, which is that Linux is not an operating system but a kernel. Linus did not create XFree86, GNOME/KDE, or any other part of a typical Linux distro except the kernel, to say that he created the "Linux operating system" is therefore misleading and inaccurate, i.e. a lie, plain and simple.

      Of course, the Slashbot anti-RMS crowd is perfectly fine with Linus spreading this lie (or at least doing nothing to stop it) and claiming/accepting credit where it is not due. After all, it's not like geeks (real geeks, not the fashionable Slashbot-type pop geek) deserve any respect or due credit.

    4. Re:The Linux "Operating System" by screenrc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Calling the operating system "Linux", also
      gives more credit than Linus deserves. And because
      you mentioned examples that (in your opinion)
      take more credit than they desever, it should
      also be even more clear that Linus gets all
      the credit, since there is no "anyone else".

  8. SCO Executive Addresses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Darl C McBride
    1799 Vintage Oak Ln
    Salt Lake City, UT 84121-6539
    (801)424-2006

    Chris Sontag
    32 Lone Holw
    Sandy, UT 84092-5505
    (801)576-0285

    1. Re:SCO Executive Addresses by sogoodsofarsowhat · · Score: 3, Funny

      It is really a great country we have here, when any common citizen can have a dump truck or two show up and deliver raw manure to almost any address in the country....or say these :)

      --
      . I love the sound of burning women and screaming rubber....
    2. Re:SCO Executive Addresses by Hackie_Chan · · Score: 2, Funny

      I've got a paper bag! Anyone got some poo and a lighter?

      --

      What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
  9. two thoughts by rifftide · · Score: 5, Interesting

    - He sounds a bit stressed out. Maybe it's the new job + trying to get 2.6 out the door + SCO and possible depositions + the usual stuff he has to deal with. Or I'm imagining things.
    - It's funny how many evolution/ecosystem type metaphors he made - maybe he's been reading the complete works of S. J. Gould or something

  10. Which one? by darnok · · Score: 5, Funny

    > San Jose Mercury News has an interview with
    > Linus

    Alright, always wanted to know what happened to that round headed kid and his delusional dog! Why didn't Schroeder ever make it as a concert pianist - was it drugs, or did the parental pressure finally get to him? And that little red headed girl - is she working in the "male entertainment" industry somewhere?

    And don't get me started on that bossy Lucy...

    1. Re:Which one? by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Funny

      > And don't get me started on that bossy Lucy...

      Isn't she running Hewlett-Packard these days?

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    2. Re:Which one? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      1970? that is the yeare the world was created, or atleast thats what my linux computer tells me.

  11. Linus == bland by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is it me or is Linus kinda BORING? I really wish he would rant and rave a little more, like RMS, that kinda thing really gets the blood moving you know?

    The whole "aww shucks, whatever works" angle is putting me to sleep.

    C'mon Linus, change the license on the kernel to the MS EULA and rename it LT/Linux and let's get this party started!

  12. The beat goes on. by Crashmarik · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Linus summed it up beautifully.

    Linux keeps evolving, and diversifying, SCO is ultimately irrelevant. Heres a follow up from IDG http://www.idg.se/ArticlePages/idgnet.asp?id=4636

    The one good thing that might come out of this, is there finally enough anger to get some changes in our idiotic patent and copyright systems.

    1. Re:The beat goes on. by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I really want SCO totally demolished over this case, but your referenced article is painfully weak. For example,

      If IBM actually allowed System V code to leak into other operating systems, SCO would only need to identify the leaks. They would be removed overnight, and their removal would be accompanied by apologies and a check covering realistic damages. That appears to be what happened when UnixSystem Labs teamed with Novell to take the University of California, Berkeley to court, claiming that System V leaked into BSD Unix. USL/Novell proved three instances of leakage, which were promptly plugged. When it was Berkeley's turn at the podium, it identified mountains of reverse leakage -- BSD code that was stripped of BSD's copyright text and pasted into System V. Oops. The plaintiffs quickly settled and had the settlement terms sealed.

      Firstly, IBM would fight tooth and nail to protect its reputation for probity in respect of IP. Secondly, the quick settlement referred to respecting the Berkeley vs Novell/USL dispute took about 18 months to resolve. Sure, by the standards of US litigation this was fast but scarcely an immediate solution. Thirdly, Novell bought USL: not quite the same as teaming up with them. Lastly, the solution that was negotiated is misrepresented. The article suggests two separate cases whereas the settlement was largely a trade off between the respective violations of the two parties.

  13. Unfortunatly, SCO's case is not about IBM by Billly+Gates · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Linus should be more carefull about SCO. Its not a SCO vs IBM at all. They are trying to squash it via fud and legal options. Look at this.

    I agree with Linus that Linux will be damaged if the case is not resolved soon. It already has with assholes like McBride suing everyone who mentions the word Linux.

    1. Re:Unfortunatly, SCO's case is not about IBM by Tumbleweed · · Score: 3, Funny

      > It already has with assholes like McBride suing everyone who mentions the word Linux.

      Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux. Did I mention Linux? Yes I did. Linux.

      Oh, by the way, Linux.

      That's all I had to say. Linux.

      ps Linux

    2. Re:Unfortunatly, SCO's case is not about IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      After reading that EETimes article, I just can't figure McBride out. Well, I can, but then it really sounds like conspiracy nation. What does he gain by tring to scare off the CELF members? It isn't like they are going to use a SCO licensed unix instead, if anything they would go with something from vxworks or, Windows CE. Scaring them off certainly doesn't help his lawsuit. It might help in the court of public opinion if he could say that CELF cancelled after seeing his "evidence" but that doesn't help him win in court nor does it increase the size of any potential awards. It all just makes that "license" that MS bought from SCO that much more disturbing. Is he really Microsoft's puppet here? It sure seems like all of his actions are exactly in line with what MS needs to attack Linux. And there we have a conspiracy.

    3. Re:Unfortunatly, SCO's case is not about IBM by the+gnat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wow, it just keeps getting more bizarre:

      I saw what appeared to be a word-for-word copy of about every third line of code in the central module of the Linux kernel," said Enderle of Giga Information Group, who viewed the alleged code violations two weeks ago. "The lines of code contained typos, misspellings and even copyright disclaimers. It appeared to constitute a violation of the license."

      Hmmmm. . . whose copyright disclaimers, exactly? Like, say "Copyright (c) 1985, 1986 The Regents of the University of California."? Puh-lease. Unless the Linux kernel contains code that is clearly labelled as "Copyright AT&T", this particular nugget of wisdom mostly just suggests that SCO copied someone else's code. (FYI: there are a few bits of kernel 2.4 labelled with AT&T, but they're also identified as being freely usable.) How fucking stupid do they think we are? And what is the "central module"?

      I guess on the bright side this means that all we need to do is hunt down every copyright notice in Linux and we'll prove or disprove the code copying... anyone? anyone? Bueller?

    4. Re:Unfortunatly, SCO's case is not about IBM by bazmonkey · · Score: 4, Informative

      Linus should be more carefull about SCO. Its not a SCO vs IBM at all. They are trying to squash it via fud and legal options.

      Linux CANNOT be destroyed/removed/etc. as a result of this lawsuit. Just as SCO can't "accidentally" make its own IP GPL'ed software by releasing Linux before it realized that it has their code in it (if it is there), Linux can't be punished for letting illegal code in without his knowledge. He didn't see SCO code, there was NO way for him to tell (again, if it is there).

      Like it or not, SCO must eventually give specifics as to what code is in the kernel, they can't claim damages without giving the defending side the ability to change ti. So Linus will soon enough learn about the offending code, and if it is indeed their code, it will be removed. Either way, true or false, the kernel is in no danger.

    5. Re:Unfortunatly, SCO's case is not about IBM by fanatic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're quoting Rob Enderle, who said of himself in this article (which also ashed Linux and it's supporters):

      "As an analyst I have to be able to argue both sides of a position because often we are asked to step in and help justify decisions that have already been made"

      I wish all of the enemies of Linux were stupid enough to say up front that their opinions belong to whoever paid them most recently.

      Also, Enderle says:

      "I saw what appeared to be a word-for-word copy of about every third line of code in the central module of the Linux kernel," .
      You could not have a better declaration that this is bullshit if you paid him for it. No way could you take 'every third line' and some how integrate it with code from some other source and make it work. Also, if it's the "central module of the linux kernel", I think we can be pretty sure Linus wrote that himself. Enderle shows only his corruption and/or his ignorance, nothing more.
      --
      "that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
    6. Re:Unfortunatly, SCO's case is not about IBM by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 2, Funny
      Linux, linux, linux, linux, lovely linux, lovely linux.

      Have you got anything without Linux?

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    7. Re:Unfortunatly, SCO's case is not about IBM by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 4, Insightful
      You are 100% correct.

      This is telling:

      However, Linux is in many ways a throwback to more primitive systems. Not only is it repeating the mistakes of its predecessors, it apparently is introducing a brand new set of problems, having to do with intellectual property.

      This line of propaganda was expected. This is the entire goal, to break the collective thoughts of disparate programmers around the world. They want to *blame* Linux, to belittle Linux, so that the megacorps can control.

      You can guess the nature of future propaganda.

      More FUD, step around, nothing to see here.

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    8. Re:Unfortunatly, SCO's case is not about IBM by screenrc · · Score: 2, Insightful
      There is little you can to defend yourself
      agaist FUD when SCO and Microsfot dominate
      the voices of he media. Especially, when they
      own a good part of the media.


      If you really want to help, all you have
      to do is to fight at the root of the problem.
      stop using MS Word , damn it! If you are not
      brave enough to stop using MS products, you
      are not brave enough to complain.


      The future of GNU/Linux depends on what *you*,
      and it will get damaged according to how *you*
      choose to live. Why care about the media?
      For many of us, it is irrelevent whether these
      English major have posisite or negative opinion
      about GNU/Linux .

    9. Re:Unfortunatly, SCO's case is not about IBM by Shadowlore · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Insightful?? Please.

      SCO has only filed ONE case, and guess who their target was? IBM.

      Everything else is just hot-air and misdirection. Well, that and flailing around looking for something, anything.

      So far, the dips at SCO have ONLY filed ONE suit. Against IBM. They would love for you to believe it is about Linux. It isn't. It is about contractual obligations.

      As long as you think it is all about getting Linux, you are buying the FUD.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    10. Re:Unfortunatly, SCO's case is not about IBM by Gleng · · Score: 2, Funny
      Have you got anything without Linux?

      What about sausage, eggs, beans and linux.

      That hasn't got much linux in it.

      --
      "Proudly Posting Without Reading The Article"
  14. Right by Faust7 · · Score: 3, Funny

    And confirmed the fact to the wife that I'm a geek

    Wife, heh. Next you'll be telling us you've had sex with said wife and have kids. ;)

  15. Direct from Linus: Linux is like Microsoft. by SN74S181 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Direct quote from the article:

    "I think they are struggling to deal with Linux partly because Linux is undermining them the same way they undercut their competition."

    I guess the old goose-gander thing should apply.

  16. Warm places... by scherrey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Q: You moved from Finland. How do you like living in Silicon Valley.

    A: Some parts I love. I have a convertible. I will never ever move to a place where I can't drive a convertible."

    Amen brother...

  17. Nobel peace prize by Cheeze · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't know anything about the Nobel Peace Prize, but it seems like a good award the world community could bestow upon Mr Torvalds for gracing us with his forsight.

    --
    Why read the article when I can just make up a snap judgement?
    1. Re:Nobel peace prize by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sorry, but "the world" is wrong. The companies that are experiencing these problems need to adapt. If they don't want to adapt, then they are welcome to not support linux - and accept the consquences of that, be they large or small.

      In the long term, "the world" will be better off by changing to the linux, or rather the free software, paradigm.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    2. Re:Nobel peace prize by Nucleon500 · · Score: 3, Funny
      Everybody knows that linux kernel is pretty lame in terms of design. Everybody knows this and everybody's hiding their head in the sand about the fact.

      So either everyone else is lying to themselves, or just you. Micro vs. monolithic kernels is a trade off (simplicity vs. speed), but with a good design, monolithic kernels are just as stable and modular. Linus won the flamewar, and Linux is winning in the real world.

      It seems that open source community's stance on this is "either it's fully open or we don't support it". Sorry, but in the world where companies have to make money they have to hide some of their IP in closed source code.

      Actually, I think hardware companies could probably find a better revenue source. Like, oh, I don't know, selling hardware? It's so crazy it just might work!

  18. Re:The Transmeta Connection by ocelotbob · · Score: 5, Interesting
    As a quick correction, the crusoe isn't a RISC chip. It's VLIW, which shares some design similarities, but at the same time, is much, much different.

    I don't know about you, but I blame the Dutch Tulip Craze^W^W^WDot Com Bust for the lack of a Unix-optimized version of the Crusoe. The original benefit of the Crusoe's code-morphing technology was supposed to be the fact that it would be able to run nearly any other platform's code natively. Then, the bubble popped, and the Crusoe was delegated to the small market of low-power consumption x86 compatible chips.

    IMO the whole thing's a shame. TMTA would have probably been a lot healthier if they would have offered a native VLIW chip in addition to the Crusoe, so that embedded people who didn't care about x86 compatibility could use this damn nice chip to provide real good, low power devices for markets such as set-top boxes, where x86 compatibility is a non-issue.

    --

    Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

  19. That's funny because by mindstrm · · Score: 2, Funny

    They stole my car from a crowded, busy parking lot in the middle of business from a well guarded mall.

  20. Being that this is a mainstream article.. by njan · · Score: 3, Insightful
    ..Linus really doesn't do very much for popular perception of how linux works. He may be stressed, and he may not have been answering with this in mind, but some of his answers really aren't particularly comprehensible to anyone who doesn't understand how linux works.

    Looking at the questions in mind, it's fairly obvious that they were set up - ie. that the journalist in question was asking for specific answers (ie. had done his homework properly), but Linus was far too prepared to answer briefly, obviously giving the journalist a reply he'd understand, but not making for good reading.

    My wife - who has a fairly good understanding of how open projects work (and has coded both programming languages and html), but is by no means a linux geek - only just understood what Linus was saying, and she's both fairly knowledgable and extremely insightful.

    Q: Do you think it works well that you have the final say?

    A: I think it works well because I don't have the final say. I have this final say in my tree. It is special in that a lot of people trust my tree. So some people will not use it if it is not my tree. That is a minority. But most people end up using various appendages. My tree is really not. Yes I have the final say on my tree. There is always this forking but there is always this joining. There is more forking than there is joining. But that just means that there are all these dead branches that not end up not being interesting. My branch is to some degree, you could think of it as the trunk of the tree. People try to join back into my tree.

    This paragraph, for instance, has so many dependancies (:p) - it requires the user to understand coding, *open source* coding, and have a fairly good understanding of the ethos of.. well, several things. Most readers will *not* be reading with these understandings - if anything, they'll read in *order* to glean these kinds of understandings of something they'll only barely have heard of.

    I don't think it's entirely because Linus doesn't speak english natively, either, to fend off potential criticism: I speak three languages, and I know *plenty* of efl (english as a foreign language) speakers who speak english which isn't as good as Linus's (which is excellent) who can explain technical issues with more clarity

    In summary.. this is yet another of the problems facing popular adoption of a niche's product. ;)

    --
    I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you
    1. Re:Being that this is a mainstream article.. by Limburgher · · Score: 4, Funny

      So, you say Linus doesn't speak English natively. Does that mean he uses an available patch to add that functionality? ;)

      --

      You are not the customer.

    2. Re:Being that this is a mainstream article.. by Zebbers · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think its beautiful, because linus is not a PR person for linux. He does interviews out of nicety, he leads out of necissity. He is NOT in any huge rush to get Linux to the top of the world, that is why is such an effective leader and that is why he has the respect he has. As he said in this interview he has no LEGAL right to anything except the Linux trademark. People listen out of respect, people use his tree out of trust, etc, etc. If anything...any common person should be able to understand that very bold statement:

      The most important person involved in Linux development has no official authority and no official position. That sums up the community alot IMHO, and is exactly what makes Linux so unique. This isnt a PR press release.

    3. Re:Being that this is a mainstream article.. by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't think it's entirely because Linus doesn't speak english natively, either, to fend off potential criticism: I speak three languages, and I know *plenty* of efl (english as a foreign language) speakers who speak english which isn't as good as Linus's (which is excellent) who can explain technical issues with more clarity.

      Having heard him speak often enough, I'm reasonably sure Linus is a more accomplished English speaker than you are. But more to the point, I question why you even felt compelled to raise the issue.

      I'm very sorry that your wife needs to have forking explained to her. Ah, take that how you will.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    4. Re:Being that this is a mainstream article.. by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...it is *necessary* in order for open-source projects to reach the mass-market (unless they sell themselves out) that any spokespeople which they have (and Linus is certainly this) pander to the needs and perceptions of the mass majority. And Linus, in this case, did *not* do this.

      Why, you should email him and give him a piece of your mind then. For my part, I felt the article his responses were artfully crafted for exactly the target audience he wished to address, and just so you know, that is not the general public. It is people like you and me, technophiles who hang out out the net and help define the future directions of technology, and hence, society. To put it less delicately, he's aiming at people who have a clue.

      If your wife needs someone to speak more directly to her level of knowledge, point her at Mad Dog Hall. Now there is a man who speaks beautifully to the masses and enjoys doing it.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
  21. Re:unix history by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Informative

    > Better hope RMS isn't reading this article, or
    > he'll be PISSED.

    RMS does not deny that the Linux kernel is entirely the work of Linus and his collaborators.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  22. Better Yet by Raul654 · · Score: 2, Funny
    --


    To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
    --E.C. Stanton
  23. Re:unix history by qtp · · Score: 4, Informative

    Better hope RMS isn't reading this article, or he'll be PISSED.

    I doubt RMS would dissagree with Linus' statement.

    Stallman may be a bore, and he may be self-rightous at times, but he does know what part is Linux and what parts are GNU.

    --
    Read, L
  24. Re:SCO vs. IBM vs. [INSERT YOUR NAME HERE] by the+gnat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This could all just go away if SCO said, "We think lines xx - xxx of the Linux kernel violate our contracts/licenses/copyrights." Then it would be easy. The Linux community looks at the code and traces it back to who put it there. The problem is solved (as far as Linux goes) once the code is removed and SCO has their "violator" if there even is one.

    This is called "discovery phase". It will be years away at this rate, unless IBM's lawyers decide to clusterfuck SCO with various motions. (I'm surprised this hasn't happened already.)

    As I've said before. SCO isn't in this to do the right thing. SCO wants money and power.

    I suspect what they're really after is some collateral damage. They'll never win against IBM, but they can ruffle enough feathers in the Linux-using corporate world to either boost their pathetic sales or to score some phat licensing deals from witless CTOs. The case doesn't even have to make it to trial: Darl just needs to continue making noise, and some idiots will think he's for real. SCO may not win <dr_evil>one billion dollars</dr_evil>, but they'll make enough and quietly drop the case.

    I know paranoid theories are in vogue here, but I don't think it's that loopy. The parade of apparently clueless analysts who have been attesting to SCO's honor and victimhood are worthless for impressing the tech community or from a legal perspective, but very good at setting a precedent for eventual licen$e fee$. . .

  25. Re:Text of the article. by RdsArts · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why o why does everybody and their grandma have to resort to analogies,

    Well, that's a interesting question.

    You see, analogies are like the string that binds together the langu-

  26. Re:Wrong by raistphrk · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, the idea that the earth has only existed for 6,000 years comes from Hebrew tradition, following the calendar from Eden up to the common era. You'll find that Y2K actually is AM 5760 according to Jewish tradition, where AM is Anno Mundi, Latin for "Year of the World". AM was derived from a number of rabbis around the Middle Ages; nowadays, many Jews choose to follow the Gregorian calendar, though they refer to history in terms of "Before Common Era" and "Common Era" rather than "Before Christ" and "Year of Our Lord".

  27. A Chapter or two Before... by mrkurt · · Score: 5, Funny
    [forgive me Lord, I couldn't resist; after Matt. 3]

    In those days, Richard Stallman appeared in the wilderness, proclaiming, "Repent, for the kingdom of free software has come near." This is the one of whom the prophet spoke when he said, "The voice of one crying out in the wilderness: prepare the way of Linus, make his paths straight". Now Stallman wore clothing consisting of worn-out jeans and a T-shirt with a leather belt around his waist, and his food was pizza and Jolt. Then the people of Berkeley and all of Silicon Valley were going out to him, and all of the region along the Bay, and they were baptized by him in the swimming pool, confessing their sins.

    But when he saw many Microsofties and Appleites coming for baptism, he said to them, "You spawn of Satan! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bear fruit worthy of repentence. Do not presume to say to yourselves, "We have Altair as our ancestor"; for I tell you, The Computer God is able from these circuit boards to raise up children to Altair. Even now the ax is lying at the root of the btrees; every btree that does not bear fruit is cut down and thrown into a fire."

    "I baptize you with water for repentence, but one who is more powerful than I is coming after me; I am not worthy to carry his sneakers. He will baptize you with The Kernel and an email. His code fork is in his hand, and he will clear the threshing floor and gather the software into distros; but the vaporware he will burn with unquenchable fire."

    --
    Always look on the briight side of life! (whistle, whistle)
    1. Re:A Chapter or two Before... by smittyoneeach · · Score: 2

      Preach it, brother.

      The irony is crowned by the fact that RMS proclaims himself atheist.

      But, like the Nazarene carpenter, and an Ayn Rand character, he has a gift for tweaking Big Brother and the Holding Company.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    2. Re:A Chapter or two Before... by rgmoore · · Score: 2, Funny
      The irony is crowned by the fact that RMS proclaims himself atheist.

      That's odd. I thought that he was the founder and patron saint of the Church of Emacs.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

  28. SCO means NOTHING to Linux or Linus by wukie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The interview clearly shows that the issue between SCO and IBM has nothing to do with Linux in general.

    The trivial bits of code which SCO probably added themselves during the Caldera era does not currently affect Linux or it's distributions.

    If SCO miraculously wins an injunction against distributions with the copyrighted code, it will be easily rectified.

    Furthermore, if it is proven that Caldera actually introduced the disputed code, which can be verified by looking at past distributions, they should have their pants sued of them.

  29. At risk of being modded as flamebait... by Big+Sean+O · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think GNU did themselves a disservice back in the late 80s/early 90s by not getting HURD written sooner.

    If that had happened then they could have named it whatever RMS wanted. Instead Linus cobbled together Linux, GPL'd the source, and pretty much stole the show as far as naming the operating system.

    Yet, much of the success of GNU is the freedom to distribute it WITHOUT permission of RMS (just as long as you provide the source code...). Of course, you can do this with non-GPL code too (*BSD, perl, python) but RMS hacked the copyright system first.

    So the real success story is that GNU's bash can be used with Linux, Windows (under Cygnus), or with Mac OS X. RMS might have lost the battle (over GNU/Linux), but he certainly won the war (bash is just one successful example).

    --
    My father is a blogger.
    1. Re:At risk of being modded as flamebait... by smittyoneeach · · Score: 2, Funny

      Consider that, if it sucks, you can say 'Fsck GNU/Hurd', or just FGH for short.
      Nice little sequence there.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  30. Re:Minix: the origin of Linux? by mark-t · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Linux was influenced heavily by Minix, yes. But Linus never had access to Minix source code when he began writing what would end up being called Linux, so your conspiracy theory of Linus borrowing code from Minix is non-viable.

  31. Visibility by smartin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I like the comment about visibility, it's true. Software developers commonly take their software from job to job. Who is going to notice if you plug in a wad of code that you wrote and brought from your previous company. After all you wrote it once, you can write it again. Since no one ever sees the source, this sort of thing happens all the time. Linux is different, it's developed in the open inside a glass house. If a developer dumps in code that they stole from work, some one might notice, and it will be fairly easy to track who did it. I'll bet that most major software companies couldn't stand that sort of scrutiny.

    --
    The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
  32. Re:Dumbfuck! by thynk · · Score: 2, Informative

    Did you even read the post before trolling it? While linux is very MUCH like Unix on many levels, it's not the same thing. Say for example the guy wants to run HPUX on his Transmeta CPU. He would need to emulate a PA-RISC HP processor, and that's NOTHING even close to the x86 instruction set, you tard.

    --

    Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
  33. Re:Minix: the origin of Linux? by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 5, Informative

    Linux was influenced heavily by Minix, yes. But Linus never had access to Minix source code when he began writing what would end up being called Linux, so your conspiracy theory of Linus borrowing code from Minix is non-viable.

    Well, considering that the Minix code was included with a book written by Tannenbaum, I think you're a little wide of the mark there. What Linus wasn't allowed to do, or anyone else for that matter, was contribute code back to Tannebaum's OS.

    Anyway, it's well-known Linux is a from-scratch implementation, which apparently started as a terminal emulator (and that possibly explains why the console handling code still sucks so much, but there you go). Andy Tannenbaum has had plenty of time to complain about any plagiarism, if Linus indulged in it, and trust me, he would have.

    --
    Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
  34. SCO court deadline? by gumpish · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am so sick of hearing about SCO.

    They HAVE filed a lawsuit, yes?

    When will there be an actual legal development, meaning what is the next noteworthy date in the legal proceedings of this case? (Hearing, trial, etc.)

  35. Re:WHITEY by Black+Hitler · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wouldn't that make it very homogeneous?

  36. Re:you silly... by Tolleman · · Score: 2, Funny

    Linus has a BMW Z3, and is driving in the finnish-french documentary "The Code". However that might be special effects..

  37. Buses Considered Harmful by Big+Sean+O · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Python had much of the same problem. Guido van Rossum is so much the center of the Python universe that he and his core developers spent a bit of effort getting the "truck number" above a certain point.

    But I don't think it's a problem with Linux. See there's nothing preventing anyone from forking Linux and making a version without Linus' input. It's just that most people support his decisions because it's his project and he's involved.

    If he gets hit by a truck, it will certainly shake up core Linux development, but either (a) someone will emerge as a unifying leader or (b) Linux development will wanter off into a thousand different directions: some will die off, some will thrive.

    But that being said, let's hope Linus has a long happy life and eventually wins the Vannevar Bush Medal.

    --
    My father is a blogger.
  38. Microsoft and SCO by Chester+K · · Score: 3, Informative

    Q: Microsoft took out a license from SCO. Do you think that was necessary and that the timing seemed strange?

    A: It's not exactly clear what they licensed.


    Microsoft's been quite honest about what they licensed from SCO. Significant portions of Interix (the Unix subsystem for Windows) are direct ports of SCO's IP (the stuff SCO actually owns, not just what they say they own).

    They weren't funding SCO's lawsuit, but it was a PR play. Now Microsoft can point to all of SCO's chest-puffery and say that they're compliant with SCO's licenses and that if you pick the Microsoft solution, you're safe from all of that liability.

    --

    NO CARRIER
  39. Re:Minix: the origin of Linux? by bovinewasteproduct · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Huh?

    Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Linux back in the very early 90's used the Minix filesystem prior to the ext series. I never did figure out why they created a whole new filesystem from scratch instead of just grabbing the BSD ufs (that just about everyone else used at the time).

    BWP

  40. Qualms with the article by 101percent · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Linus Torvalds is the creator of the Linux operating system..."

    More misunderstanding. I know it's preaching to the choir, but Linux is just the kernel, and the GNU project deserves just as much representation as does Linus Torvalds for it's creation of low level tools such as GCC. Linus is hardly the sole creator of the base system, although he did write the kernel as I'm sure you know.

    "...the open source version of Unix..."

    Linux is not a version of Unix. GNU/Linux is a derivative clone of UNIX. The system was initially chosen by the GNU project to be a clone of UNIX because it was the most portable OS at the time. I don't know how closely the Linux kernel compares to UNIX kernels and such, but GNU/Linux is definitly UNIX-like as a result of initial planning by the Free Software Foundation. Furthermore, if Linux was a version of UNIX (all of which must be licensed) wouldn't this whole interview (at least the SCO parts) be pointless since SCO licenses UNIX? Saying it's a version implys that it uses UNIX code, which is what brought us to all this madness in the first instance. Honestly, do these reports even know what they're saying, or do they just run off scripts?

    "He is a technical leader and an outspoken advocate of open source development, which allows software users to develop and modify their own versions of software for free."

    Notice how they use the term "for free" rather than something like "freely modify". Just a subtle point which I felt was worthy of pointing out. Also, notice the commonly used over-patronage of Linus. I think the media does this, unconciously, to effectivley set the boundaries of acceptable discourse on the amazing social phenomenon that is the movement commonly refered to as the "Open Source Movement," which sets unprecidented examples for healthy human society and interaction in comparison to the failed systems of the past. One can't even begin to draw parallels simply because of this sort-of systematic patronage of one man, and overlooking of an entire movement.

    For our readers who don't know the origins of Linux, can you talk about how it was written given the existence of Unix?

    A: The origin was all written by me. For the first six months or so I was the only person working on Linux. It took almost a year before there was a major contribution from people outside. It's all original code since day one.

    Linus: "I am at the center...


    You get a lot of folks bashing on RMS because he politely asks people to at least acknowledge the work of the Free Software Foundation by calling the system GNU/Linux, but here you have Torvalds claiming entire responisibility of the OS, granted in response to a question about SCO's involvement in the origins of the OS, but nonetheless claiming total responsibility. So how can we conclude that RMS is cocky when we have this kind of total disregard for everyone else involved in the development of the system.

    Until we stop using terms like Linux meaning the whole OS and Intellectual Property as being every legal issue under the sun, we simply can't even begin to have a logical discussion about the issues at hand, and will only further confuse those who may casually read about these subjects in the news.

    After reading this article I really thought about a lot of things, and came to the conclusion that the term "Open Source" is really pointless and should be avoided. If you think about it, all source is open. Propreitary code is open to the developers who work on it. It's just maintained in a system of checks, balances, non-disclosure agreements, and "need to know" prediciments. What you're really talking about when you discuss "open-source" is exactly how open it is, and who exactly it's open to. That's why I think it's better to use the term free when discussing these matters, as it's a more liberating term without the boundaries that "open" source can have. Sure it's "open", but who exactly is it open to? If something's free, it's just free; Their are no heirarchiel limitations.

    1. Re:Qualms with the article by Kourino · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Uhhhh ... wow.

      You get a lot of folks bashing on RMS because he politely asks people to at least acknowledge the work of the Free Software Foundation by calling the system GNU/Linux, but here you have Torvalds claiming entire responisibility of the OS, granted in response to a question about SCO's involvement in the origins of the OS, but nonetheless claiming total responsibility.

      That's funny ... in the part of the article you're quoting, Linus is just saying "I wrote the beginning of Linux [yes, he's talking about the kernel] myself, and I'm still the main person responsible for it [yes, he's talking about the kernel]". Which is true, in that he's basically the Linux project manager. (If you disagree with me, try getting something into his tree without convincing him that it's emininently useful and won't break shit.) That's not really saying that he dictates what happens to GNU/Linux, not by a long shot.

      Look, as much as I agree with the GNU/Linux terminology in principle, I think it's really clear in context when Linus is talking about Linux and when he's talking about GNU/Linux in this article. Linus may be a bastard with an eye on world domination, but he's not an megalomaniacal bastard with an eye on world domination. (I will not be drawn into the subtleties of this debate here, because my personal opinion is irrelevant, and quite frankly, I have nothing new to bring to either side. And yes, there are people who could read this who don't know the difference; perhaps you should email the article author and ask him to post a revised revision, if you're concerned about it.)

      I believe the rest of your comments would be better directed at the conductor of the interview, who's responsible for the content, rather than the people at Slashdot, 99% of whom already know this.

    2. Re:Qualms with the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A few points. GNU didn't choose Linux. Most distros chose GNU. GNU is pretty replacable as far as the underlying system goes, except possibly for the compilation process of the kernel (that'd take some tweaking). Also, GNU didn't design it to be like Unix, Linus did. More correctly, he designed it to be like Minix and Minix was like Unix. Finally, UNIX the trademark is owned by SCO, but Unix the source code was part of BSD (completely rewritten out just to end the whole AT&T hassle) and that's open source. SCO doesn't own some magical right to all Unix source is clearly evidence by the whole BSD/AT&T fiasco. Anyways, Unix can mean three main things: UNIX, the trademark; Unix, the various flavors of UNIX; and Unix, the generic term for any system which behaves reasonably like the various flavors of UNIX. Just to be more exact, most people would count a Unix to be any Unix flavor that shares source with the original AT&T/BSD core source. Because of this, Linux is usually describe as Unix-like, to demonstrate that it was based on completely original source that was designed as a work-alike. Linux could actually include AT&T/BSD code, so long as it can be licensed properly (not sure the legality of GPLing BSD source, but I don't think all those sources were BSDed).

      In any case, you're giving a good deal more credit to the FSF than they deserve. Not to say they don't deserve a lot for making GNU, but Linus aims Linux, not the FSF. FSF is still working on HURD, their own kernel. Out of curiosity, why don't you more often see RMS or his supports talking about GNU/Windows, GNU/FreeBSD, GNU/Solaris, etc? Or Gnome/OpenView/Gnu/Solaris? The point of calling Linux the OS is to distinguish the kernel, since any of the BSD kernels, Solaris, etc are pretty good drop in replacements for GNU and the like because despite their diversity and even at times lack of a common source base, each kernel still manage to work similar enough to form a united bases. Personally, I'd like to see more interviews with the developers of KDE, Gnome, Icewm, XFree86, and GNU where they could receive credit for being the creator of an OS. I don't think any one of them deserves any less credit. It's just unreasonable to tack on an extended diatrab of possible extensions when what's really at issue is not GNU (ironically since MS even sells GNU, so there's no way for it to be competition with MS really) but the GPL and the kernel which has a growing following and currently is in the news. In any case, why not suggest to various news organizations to interview other GPLed software that's often seen as part of the "Linux OS" to let the developers who are equally important have their say in development. I don't think Linus will mind sharing the mic.

    3. Re:Qualms with the article by sffubs · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What about the rest of the programs which run on top of the Linux kernel, making it useable for the majority of people? Surely that deserves a mention too?


      My current system is GNU/XFree86/OpenOffice/Opera/Wolfenstein Enemy Territory/.../Linux


      --sffubs

      --
      ݼ)s$æúßðíÊ'öX'îò5^àûßQç£
  41. The point by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You're missing the point. It's annoying to have to constantly remember to refer to "GNU/Linux" because fanatics jump on you for not "giving respect" and for "spreading this lie." It's bizarre and extremist, as if I'm not giving credit or appreciation in my mind for GNU.

    Linux is running all my drivers, talking to all my hardware, managing my memory and my processes. It is controlling my computer as an operational system. You can take GNU out of the equation with a bit of work and Linux will still go at it.

    I choose to use Linux. It just so happens GNU tools are included on the distros I use, but I'm not choosing to use Linux for those GNU tools, I'm choosing to use it for the kernel, its hardware support, and so forth. If all of GNU was replaced, I'd still be using that Linux kernel. That's the difference, my motivation for using it.

    I use Office and Dev-Cpp almost exclusively on Windows, but I don't say Office/Bloodshed/Windows, because I'm choosing to use Windows, and I just happen to have to use those apps all the time under Windows to get anything done.

    You guys are like religious fundies, I swear. Loosen up. I can already hear your responses now.

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
    1. Re:The point by fucksl4shd0t · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Linux is running all my drivers, talking to all my hardware, managing my memory and my processes. It is controlling my computer as an operational system. You can take GNU out of the equation with a bit of work and Linux will still go at it.

      True.

      I choose to use Linux. It just so happens GNU tools are included on the distros I use, but I'm not choosing to use Linux for those GNU tools, I'm choosing to use it for the kernel, its hardware support, and so forth. If all of GNU was replaced, I'd still be using that Linux kernel. That's the difference, my motivation for using it.

      True.

      Allow me some leeway, here, though. HEre's more, not from your post:

      Linus Torvalds is the creator of the Linux operating system,

      This is a lie. Linus Torvalds did not create the Linux Operating System, he created the Linux Kernel.

      Whether or not you give a shit about GNU, and the fact that LInus would never have made Linux without GNU (as he has said many times, so you can google for it, you need the exercise), is completely irrelevant for the article. Furthermore, GNU is completely irrelevant for the article. The only correction needed is this:

      Linus Torvalds is the creator of the Linux kernel,

      As you can see, my edited version is much clearer, and in fact completely jives with your own goals.

      RMS asks us to call the operating system GNU/Linux, but he never ever says that you can't refer to Linux without prepending GNU/. In fact, he specifically says that when you are referring to Linux the kernel, you should not prepend GNU/.

      Get a brain, asshole, and learn to read.

      --
      Like what I said? You might like my music
    2. Re:The point by Arker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While you made a decent post, I really think you too are missing the point.

      Stallman had a dream. A dream everyone else thought was crazy. A dream of a Free as in speech Operating System, a kernel, text editors, compilers, everything you need to actually use the computer, and all Free. He called that dream GNU. And because, back when everyone else thought he was crazy, he persevered, worked his ass off and didn't give up, we now have actually not one but several different Free Operating Systems. There's one to run on just about any hardware you can find, from a PS2 to an old Acorn box to an IBM supercomputer.

      Did Stallman write all that code? Of course not. Did the FSF write it all? Of course not. That would have been silly. He knew from the beginning that road was impossible. They just wrote from scratch what they had to - i.e. X was already there, no need to reinvent the wheel, but there weren't any decent Free compilers, so they made GCC. Linux came along and contributed a kernel, one piece among many to make the OS.

      If people don't want to call GNU by it's proper name, no one can force them. But don't let the issue be sidetracked into trying to label what percentage is GNU and what is X and so forth - it doesn't matter. GNU was the vision, and the FSF produced the pieces no one else would, to make that vision reality. I, for one, think we all owe them a debt we can never repay. Calling the OS by it's proper name is only fair.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    3. Re:The point by Arker · · Score: 2, Informative

      Honest, Linux would have gone full-steam ahead if GNU was there or not.

      This is where you're fundamentally wrong. Even Linus himself is on record multiple times to the contrary. Without GNU he would never have had the tools to start the project, and he wouldn't have had anything to run on his kernel even if he somehow managed to create one without a compiler anyway!

      You accuse Stallman of being bitter, I don't see that, but if he were it would be understandable with the sort of ignorance of history your showing here being common.

      Even more irritating is that people are made to feel like they're not showing appreciation if they don't use "GNU/" with every iteration of a reference to the Linux operating system. It's fanatical and religious.

      The amazing thing is you probably believe what you're writing. *sigh*

      Linux is not an Operating System. Linux is a kernel. If you don't believe me believe Linus.

      If it's fanatical and religious to make this point, then I guess it's fanatical and religious to point out that the CPU is a chip, not the entire box? I suppose it's fanatical and religious to point out that 3.5 inch removable magnetic media are 'floppies' not 'hard disks' even though they are, indeed, rather rigid in comparison to 5.25 inch removable magnetic media?

      At worst it might be pedantic. Religious and fanatical is beyond a stretch though.

      Stallman failed at the HURD, and so they reluctantly had to adopt the newly sprung Linux kernel to get anything done for their tools, and now they want everyone to act as though they were the ones who got the whole Linux phenomena going because of it. "It's GNU/Linux!"

      This is just more historical ignorance. The HURD didn't 'fail', and no one least of all Stallman was 'reluctant' to use Linux. Linux was a godsend. The HURD had been torn between two completely different design goals, one to get a working Free Unix-like kernel going ASAP so that GNU could be a full OS instead of a halfbreed, the other to really push the envelope and produce a next-generation kernel that did far more and did it right. When Linux became usable that tension went away - now we had the kernel to satisfy the first goal, and the HURD team could concentrate on the second.

      GNU should be grateful Linux even came along in the first place, or they'd be nothing right now but a bunch of Solaris tools!

      Yet more historical ignorance.

      If Linus hadn't created Linux, we'd be running GNU/BSD. The BSD kernel became Free shortly after Linux became usable, you know. Well, obviously you didn't. But you should. There was discussion about using it at the time, but ultimately there wasn't enough interest simply because Linux was already in place and working well.

      If BSD had become Free just a little earlier, Linus never would have written a kernel, he would have just used GNU with the BSD kernel.

      Seeing how poorly you know the history behind these things, I can understand why you think what you do. But that doesn't make it any less wrong, or any less pathetic.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
  42. Why Does SCO need to go to Japan? by b29651 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    http://www.eetimes.com/sys/news/OEG20030703S0026 Did the People ask to see the code?If they didnt will they have to sign NDA?Interesting things keep coming up.If it is just between IBM and SCO why do they even need to concern themselves with CELF?

  43. Qualms with your post by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    More misunderstanding. I know it's preaching to the choir, but Linux is just the kernel, and the GNU project deserves just as much representation as does Linus Torvalds for it's creation of low level tools such as GCC. Linus is hardly the sole creator of the base system, although he did write the kernel as I'm sure you know.

    You could still use Linux without GNU tools. Linux is the kernel that is controlling my freaking laptop. It is operating my computer into a usable state. I can replace bash, GCC, and all the rest if I wanted.

    Linux is not a version of Unix. GNU/Linux is a derivative clone of UNIX.

    Ah, a "GNU/Linux" weenie.

    He said "open source version," which is another way of saying it's the open source counterpart, clone, whatever. Version wasn't meant to be so literal.

    The system was initially chosen by the GNU project to be a clone of UNIX because it was the most portable OS at the time. I don't know how closely the Linux kernel compares to UNIX kernels and such, but GNU/Linux is definitly UNIX-like as a result of initial planning by the Free Software Foundation. Furthermore, if Linux was a version of UNIX (all of which must be licensed) wouldn't this whole interview (at least the SCO parts) be pointless since SCO licenses UNIX? Saying it's a version implys that it uses UNIX code, which is what brought us to all this madness in the first instance. Honestly, do these reports even know what they're saying, or do they just run off scripts?

    You posted an entire insane diatribe over the non-literal use of the word "version." Go see Terminator 3 and relax a bit.

    Notice how they use the term "for free" rather than something like "freely modify". Just a subtle point which I felt was worthy of pointing out. Also, notice the commonly used over-patronage of Linus. I think the media does this, unconciously, to effectivley set the boundaries of acceptable discourse on the amazing social phenomenon that is the movement commonly refered to as the "Open Source Movement," which sets unprecidented examples for healthy human society and interaction in comparison to the failed systems of the past. One can't even begin to draw parallels simply because of this sort-of systematic patronage of one man, and overlooking of an entire movement.

    Maybe they just liked the idea of free stuff.

    You get a lot of folks bashing on RMS because he politely asks people to at least acknowledge the work of the Free Software Foundation by calling the system GNU/Linux, but here you have Torvalds claiming entire responisibility of the OS, granted in response to a question about SCO's involvement in the origins of the OS, but nonetheless claiming total responsibility.

    He claimed responsibility...for LINUX! You injected "OS" and went off on another GNU rant. The two letters "OS" were not even uttered. He did not claim total responsibility for "everything."

    So how can we conclude that RMS is cocky when we have this kind of total disregard for everyone else involved in the development of the system.

    Because RMS didn't have anything to do with the original code of Linux, and it WAS all Linux those first six months. What is your friggin' point? Next.

    Until we stop using terms like Linux meaning the whole OS and Intellectual Property as being every legal issue under the sun, we simply can't even begin to have a logical discussion about the issues at hand, and will only further confuse those who may casually read about these subjects in the news.

    You are so clearly biased.

    Linux is my operating system. I'm not afraid to say it. It is the software that is managing all the of the hardware in my computer, providing drivers, making sure memory is taken care of, managing all of my processes...GNU tools are in there along with a bunch of other things. I could replace all the GNU tools with other software and still use Linux. Linux is operating my system, whether or not G

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
  44. My hero! by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Q: There was some mention of the origins of Linux being murky."

    A: There has been a lot of rumor. It's more of an allegation. It's complete crap."

    Don't you just love it when Linus dispells all those rumors???

    GO LINUS!!

  45. OT: Re:The point by Chops · · Score: 2
    You're missing the point. It's annoying to have to constantly remember to refer to "GNU/Linux" because fanatics jump on you for not "giving respect" and for "spreading this lie."
    These things you put in quotes are true descriptions of the situation. If being corrected about them annoys you, perhaps you should start making correct statements :-).
    Linux is running all my drivers, talking to all my hardware, managing my memory and my processes. It is controlling my computer as an operational system.
    Yep, that's what a kernel does.
    I choose to use Linux. It just so happens GNU tools are included on the distros I use, but I'm not choosing to use Linux for those GNU tools, I'm choosing to use it for the kernel, its hardware support, and so forth. If all of GNU was replaced, I'd still be using that Linux kernel. That's the difference, my motivation for using it.

    Okay, this sounds like pure cognitive dissonance. You're so fond of iptables and /proc that you're accepting bash, Gnome, printf, and all the other extraneous GNU "tools" that you're forced to install as well?

    When Linux started out, the goal was to build a hobbyist OS. Linus used to ship a C library, shell, and most of the other parts of a real and complete OS. People started getting sick of the duplication of effort, though, and one by one replaced the non-kernel parts with their GNU equivalents (or just used them in the first place), until now we have a system which is mixed GNU and Linux, with GNU predominating. Because of this bizarre history, though, it's still called "Linux," and the old references to "Linux the OS" are still in use, even though they're no longer accurate.

    I used to be aware of this and not care; after hearing some of the distortions, irrelevancies, and outright falsehoods ("Gnome is not part of GNU") that people come up with to explain why the GNU people don't deserve much credit for "Linux," I've decided that RMS is right and calling the OS "Linux" is misleading.

    You guys are like religious fundies, I swear. Loosen up. I can already hear your responses now.
    I'm sorry you feel that way. It seems to annoy some people even to mention GNU (I'm not sure why), but this stuff about "Linux" being mostly GNU is actually true.
  46. Re:You meant Stallman. by swillden · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Could go either way. I think it looks more like Stallman is standing on the shoulders of Linus. Without the emergance of the Linux kernel, most of Stallman's work was just sitting there looking pretty.

    You're looking at the wrong work. Stallman's true insights are not embodied in the GNU codebase, they're embodied in the GPL. His crowning achievement was the observation that he could "hack the copyright system", employing copyright law itself to make software "free". In retrospect this seems like a simple, and even obvious, idea, but that's a characteristic of all really great ideas.

    This achievement doesn't really deserve a peace prize, since it's not clear how it fosters world peace, but it deserves recognition. Linus wrote a simple OS kernel and has done a great job of managing its ongoing growth and development as it turned from a toy into a serious tool. RMS started the whole free software movement.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.