FSF, GCC, and SCO Compiler Support

Ancipital was one of several who noted that a special patch is going into GCC. The file is README.SCO, and it is a short writeup about the SCO situation written by the FSF. It stops short of demanding that GCC developers strip SCO support from the compiler, and says more will be announced before the next compiler release.

Comments

Damn

[ultrabot]

They should have just removed the support. I don't see how it would harm normal people, as they can keep on using older compilers.

Anyway, this is the right direction. I just hope projects can strip out SCO support without breaking much good code.

Re:Damn

[ergonal]

Maybe because they didn't want to stoop to SCO's level (yet).

This is not the way....

[shachart]

I do not believe this is the right way to approach the issue. Let them work this ugly legalese - in courts. How are we any different from Microsoft, if we happen to "exclude" some support from projects because we do not like the receipient? I do not say "let's all develop code for SCO support", but please do not remove any *existing* code.

Re:This is not the way....

[ultrabot]

How are we any different from Microsoft, if we happen to "exclude" some support from projects because we do not like the receipient?

It's open source, SCO can fix whatever it wants. I don't see why we should maintain any code who is only going to benefits instances we don't wish to support. Even existing code needs maintenance.

but please do not remove any *existing* code.

On the contrary, please do. Call it a cleanup or refactoring. GCC removes support for obsolete archs all the time.

Re:This is not the way....

[irc.goatse.cx troll]

"Why should community authors help SCO sell their wares and fund the holy war against, essentially, themselves?"

Because it's the only way to remain free. 'I may not agree with what you are saying, but I will defend your right to say it to the death'. We can't just stop supporting a large userbase because the company that produced their os is now doing some things that are against some peoples ethics/morals.

Re:This is not the way....

[Rysc]

Free software is about community. SCO is attempting to destroy that community. Why should community authors help SCO sell their wares and fund the holy war against, essentially, themselves?

The reason OSS is being successful is our reputation. Not only do we have the moral high ground when it comes to software, but we are percieved to have the moral high ground.

Developers out there may rave aout how it will never work, and they can't make money at it, but they'll all admit it's a really nice idea if only it would work. That's good will we've got going for us. That's more valuable than any money.

If we, as a community, start fighting dirty, then we lose. On the surface it seems like a good idea, but a little while down the road the OSS community will no longer be seen as morally upright. We will be vindictive little bastards, and people (and companies) working with us will forever be wary, waiting for that knife in the back.

Confidence, that's the game we're playing. SCO undermines ours by this case of theirs, but we undermine our own even more so if we hit back like this.

The OSS definition states one cannot descriminate against people or organizations. How can you suggest it is right to exclude our enemy from the benefits of Free software? Sure, they will take and take from us, but eventually they will be overtaken as well and will become part of our community. If we exclude them, it is no longer Free for anyone, it becomes something only for a privileged few.

This fight isn't about SCO, or the people who may be harmed by not having the latest GCC. This fight is about our reputation in the future and the spirit of the movement.

Slippery Slope...

[EvilTwinSkippy]

You aren't damaging SCO by stripping support in GCC, you are damaging SCO's users. I do not subscribe to either notion of "My enemy's enemy is my friend" nor "My enemy's friend is my enemy."

We must take the higher ground and turn the other cheek, lest we threaten the very trust upon which Open Source is built.

dropping SCO support would hurt the wrong people

[wfmcwalter]

I heartily support the readme.sco idea (frankly its wording is fairly mild).

But GCC shouldn't remove SCO support for reasons of pique or spite. As other posters have said, it won't hurt SCO one bit, but to do so would make GCC, FSF, and the entire free/open software community look petty, and perhaps untrustworthy. GNU software has a long history of running on unsupportive or openly hostile platforms (i.e. windows) and its continuing to do so gives users of those platforms an incremental upgrade-path to freedom. Any action like this, however justified it might feel, would do much more to harm innocent SCO customers and the entire free software community's reputation.

Re:do it!! do it!! do it!!

[hellbunnie]

Yeah, but I'm not so sure that SCO actually want customers anymore. They know that their market share is falling, acting the bully isn't going to change that. I reckon all this lawsuit stuff is just their dying throes, in which case hurting SCO users won't really have any impact on SCO.

Don't do it!

[EvilTwinSkippy]

I hate SCO. But to throw a spanner into the works for every GCC user on SCO is evil. It would be like razing an entire town because the city council has a border dispute with you.

Your problem is with the officials, not the inhabitants. All you would achieve is to turn sympathetic users of GCC into your sworn enemy. At what gain?

Many companies use proprietary technology. Some misappropriate Free Software, others allow it to mingle with their own. When a misappropriation takes place, our action need to be litigation, not misguided populist sentiment.

Re:What exactly is being done?

[Arker]

No, read it again.

It says they've been urged to do so, but will not at this time. They're considering it, but have very good reasons not to. If they did remove it, it would be basically a symbolic move that would hurt a few innocent people. Putting in this readme drawing attention to the controversy achieves a similar symbolic statement, without hurting those people. I think it's a good move.

Re:do it!! do it!! do it!!

[Arker]

SCOs customers are a miniscule source of profit anyway. Their customer base is tiny and shrinking. No one with half a brain has bought it in years, there install base is mostly very old installations that are only there because no one wants to break a working system.

Trying to coerce people like that usually backfires. The people still using SCO, all 10 of them, are already working on installing Linux or *BSD instead. No need to antagonise them. They didn't file the lawsuits, and they didn't buy from the company calling itself SCO in the first place anyway - they bought from what is now Tarantella and while you might not like old SCO either, they're certainly on a different plane from Darl & Co.

Re:do it!! do it!! do it!!

[JimDabell]

The README suggests that removing support for SCO unix from GCC would hurt SCO's users, but not SCO. I disagree: If SCO's users can't develop software for their chosen platform anymore, then they will likely choose another platform, and SCO will be the one hurting in the end (which is the desired effect).

Well that depends on whether or not SCO's operating systems are a part of their business plan any more. A lot of people would argue that they are just a lawsuit company now.

There's a big problem with this proposed action though. What message does it send to people who happen to be using SCO, and decided upon Free Software (GCC) for their compiler? Essentially, they are getting the message "you are using an operating system we don't like, so we'll leave you high and dry". It's Free Software, so it's not as bad as when a proprietary vendor drops support, but it's still a big business risk.

We don't want to give the impression that you can't depend on Free Software unless you buy into the whole philosophy and only use FSF-approved operating systems. I think they have done the right thing by making a public issue out of this before actually doing anything, it lets people plan ahead in case this goes ahead, and it gives end-users a chance to talk to SCO about it (if they aren't already).

Re:Slashdot -- Your Daily SCO Update Channel.

[bigjocker]

Any chance we can stop giving this corporate protection racket so much free publicity?

You know you can NOT click on the article? If it bothers you so much, why not disable the Caldera/SCO topic from your preferences? Heck, how was your thinking process? "Lets click in this story that disgustes me so much, scroll dow, hit reply, write a troll comment about how sick are we with this SCO news thing".

Speak for yourself, I for one am grateful with the following Slashdot is doing to this case. Some of us (and our families) LIVE out of linux, and you can always NOT click the link and go read another story.