Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Services for Unix and OpenBSD

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the reduce-reuse-recycle dept.

ubiquitin writes "If you use strings on Microsoft's Services for Unix (SFU) interoperability suite which was developed by Interex you find that it is largely composed of source from the OpenBSD 3.0 source tree according to a recent deadly.org article."

5 of 150 comments (clear)

  1. What's your point? by Blackknight · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The BSD license allows anybody to do this.

    1. Re:What's your point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This shows that the Services for Unix aren't derived from SCO sources, and therefore MS lied.

      No it doesn't. It's shows that the userland utilities are "largely composed" of BSD source code. Services For Unix isn't just a collection of *BSD binaries ported and recompiled for windows, it includes a kernel-level posix compatability layer. We have no idea where they/interix got that code from. Better put on your tinfoi hat. They probably stole the code from linux.

    2. Re:What's your point? by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, because Services for Unix is composed entirely of 'strings'.

      umm right.

      All of the GPL'd software that's in SFU has source available for download as well, but I suppose that since most of that source (if not all of it) can be shown not to be derived from SCO, then MS doesn't need the license, right? Then again, there's always the closed-source portion of SFU, some portion of which is original code...

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
  2. Re:Wooo by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >>>Administrator ability to log in as another user, without their password, using their environment.

    Nope. That one is intentionally NOT in there. Go have a look at OpenVMS, the software from yesteryear that MS built NT. There was supposed to be a form of audit logs that you must either reset their password OR take Control Rights of. Either way, the user is tipped off that admin/root was playing in their acct.

    >>>Ability to easily assign a printer or share you've set up as administrator to all other users of the machine/domain... and don't even mention group policies (what a cluster fuck).

    It's not that hard. Check the permissions of the local device/directory is. Then control who has access to the share. It's no harder than user/group/everybody along with the NSA patches on Linux.

    >>>Ability to easily assign drive mappings/printers dependant on what groups a users belongs to (again don't EVEN say you can do thit with group policies).

    Simply done with logon scripts, as the AC said. He IS right, you know..

    And if you're going to get pissed off at MS, at least do so with the right reasons. First, there's no way to configure a server decently over a modem line. MS already created edit.com, which is a usable editor. Why not have a SYNC program in /winnt/etc that lets you see, a list of txt configs that control the system? You could back up the configs and know you have a hardcopy of the conf's. Once you're done editing these files, you could re-run the sync program and have it re-populate the registry.

    Next bitch is about MS not patching critical software. Here at my work, we were hit with 2 nasty viruses recently. If you say that we should have had them patched you're wrong. The patches themselves have "added functionality" which we could not install on our clients until we determined they were OK to do so. Essentially, a patch is SUPPOSED to fix a wrong, not add extra crap.

    Third, is I cannot log in to multiple accounts at once. Exapmle: I can log into my user on my Linux box, and (since I'm in wheel) su to root to get certain root-only things done. With su/sudo/kdesu/gsu, correct attributes with each user are applied properly. In windows, there is no way I can do this (I know xp has it, but It's not a server os). Some of you might say, "Use the RunAs service" (hold down left-shift and left click on program, or called from command line). It doesnt propigate environment varibles correctly, so many programs wont install/run. Heck, even I can run XWindows stuff as multiple users! Why cant windows?

    --
  3. This is good news by barries · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I for one am really glad to see MS grabbing as much OSS code as they can for implementing the more standards compliant portions of their products, if only to see them ship more stable, secure code.

    I've a lot more faith in the code they grab from the *BSD trees than in their own internally generated code and, having to run WinXX a lot (my VMWare Workstation currently has 8 open machines in it and 6 of them are WinXX: WinNT (1), Win2K(4) and WinXP(1), two are RH8), I'd rather have the peace of mind.

    - Barrie