The GNU people have seemed a little passive on the issue too. How long will it be before SCO "finds" proprietary code in various GNU sources?
The Free Software Foundation has for years had a position that all code donated to their projects must have a written and signed copyright assignment. If you work for company, they have to sign it too.
One reason for this is that if there's any allegation of infringement, the FSF can claim to have made a reasonable effort to prevent it. When the infringing code is pointed out, they'll know who sent it in, and that person is liable. In this case, it might well prove that Caldera/SCO contributed the code in question.
This makes contributing to their projects more hassle than just firing off a patch to somebody else. You have to wait for a piece of paper to physically reach the FSF in Massachusetts and be processed by their clerk. However it may turn out that their caution is justified.
However it's not a perfect protection: SCO haven't produced any evidence, and so counter-evidence is of limited use. Knowing who wrote every line of code is litte help if SCO won't say which lines they dislike. And all the evidence and legal strength in the world won't help against somebody spewing FUD.
Would DiDio know copied code if it bit her on the ass? Even if she did, without context that SCO are unwilling to supply (revision histories, mail archives, etc) it is impossible to know which way the copying occurred.
And what's this "group from MIT" that DiDio and SCO refer to? Do they have a name, or is just some random MIT dropouts? Has MIT actually agreed for its name to decorate this shabby confidence trick?
SCO has always claimed that there was a lot of Unix code in recent Linux kernels, hundreds of thousands of lines they claim.
That's simply not true. In earlier interviews, SCO said that "the tainted code is not in the Linux kernel that Linus [Torvalds] and others have helped develop. We're talking about what's on the periphery of the Linux kernel."
That is directly contradicted by their current (incredible) claim that there is hundreds of thousands of lines of their code throughout the kernel.
There is a point at which "evolving your strategy" blends into a liar or con man frantically changing their story.
SCO have operations in a number of other countries. You could in principle sue or take other action against them in the country in which you reside or do business, particularly if SCO's representatives there have made baseless statements that damage your business.
The cases in Australia, Poland, and Germany were all lodged against SCO's local subsidiary, if I understand correctly.
A judgement against SCO in Australia probably won't finish them off, but they don't have a lot of money to lose, and every bit helps.
By all accounts (I haven't worked there) India has enough structural problems that they're giving themselves quite a handicap against the US. Apparently the amount of government paperwork required to accomplish even a trivial task is pretty massive. As a recent Economist article said:
Many Indians believe that a large part of the blame for their country's inferior economic performance must be borne by the political system. China, the argument goes, is a dictatorship where the government and the businesses it favours can do what they want--change laws, build infrastructure, secure licences, fiddle their books--all without brooking any opposition. In India, however, not only does every step require dealing with an inept, corrupt and intrusive bureaucracy, but the democratic system itself also imposes extra costs and delays. For every important and helpful reform, such as VAT, there is a powerful lobby that will oppose it.
But guess what they were much better of before the white(british) landed there and looted their wealth.(Kohinoor in the british crown.)
Yeah, Indians used to eat diamonds for breakfast every day!
It seems to me that the presence or absence of gemstones would have precisely zero effect on the standard of living of your average person.
The Europians were eating raw food(the british in particular)
Fire was only introduced to Europe from India in the 1500s! Everybody in Europe just used to knaw on raw meat, often without even cutting it off the carcass! I suppose you think all the written recipes dating back to pre-Roman times for cooked food (including herbs and spices) have just been made up to make India look bad?
7. IBM unfairly competed with SCO by promoting Linux.
Basically SCO just keep bluffing and upping the ante. Unfortunately for McBridge, IBM (a) knows their bluffing, and (b) has a gun. Random spectators are wondering about "what if they're right?", but the real question is "will they lose their life, or just their shirt?"
Yep: Valgrind is an automatic fish-barrel shooter. Finding memory bugs is just so easy.
I'd be really sad if I had to work on a platform other than x86 Linux that doesn't have it. In fact, I know people in BSD production environments who develop on Linux specifically so that they can use it.
Of course, if this is set in the 80s presumably it didn't exist yet....
Re:Obviously fiction/fantasy
on
The Bug
·
· Score: 1
Building with warnings turned on would probably have saved you 40 minutes. (Depending on your compiler.)
If Apple were to lower their prices a bit, they'd likely sell more Macs to folks like me who view their current prices as prohibitive.
You know, the same goes for BMW.
Apple's positioning at the moment is that they don't *want* to sell more Macs to people like you. I say that with all due respect -- they're not selling one to me either at the moment. They're more concerned with offering the best designed and integrated package, even if it's more expensive for the MIPS. I can respect that, even if I'm a cheapskate who'd rather put Debian on an x86 built from parts.
distcc does Objective C and C++. They're just so infrequently used outside of OS X that they're not worth mentioning in the Debian release.
Distributed compilaton of Java is a whole other kettle of fish. I don't think there is any good solution in Xcode or elsewhere.
it won't be of the same caliber as Xcode.
Strangely enough it's exactly the same thing, rebadged, and with some Aqua sugar-coating.
Go away troll.
Re:GCC Distributed Compiling
on
Jaguar is Over
·
· Score: 1
Yes, the distributed build system is based on distcc. (I'm the distcc author, and I have been speaking to people at Apple.)
There are some Apple-specific hooks to integrate with their IDE and their nonstandard precompiled header system, but it's basically the same.
I applaud Apple for getting in touch early on and seeing what they could do to help with open source development.
Does it check if the libraries and compilers on the machines are producing the same object code?
I'm not sure. That has been a minor problem for distcc, because there is no really satisfactory OS/distribution independent way to check the versions of compilers and tool chains. (Red Hat users will recall that sometimes 2.96 aint 2.96). Because Apple know all the gritty details of OS/compiler versioning they can check this.
There is a switch -msse2 to enable it. There was no good reason for Apple to have SSE2 disabled, other than to cripple the competition.
On the contrary, some versions of gcc produce buggy code in particular cases with SSE2 enabled. I'm not saying this necessarily did or didn't apply to Apple's tests, but it is possible there was a valid reason to turn it off.
I'm sure that's frustrating, but I wouldn't stress too much about it. Military people are generally pretty conservative about technology, with some notable exceptions. If Linux continues to improve and has good commercial support and ex-military people in suits to make the pitch then I think they'll come around.
Meanwhile, some nameless Australian agencies are buying HP Linux machines literally by the truckload. It's good to see.
It's funny that you should use that example. There is a wonderful old satire by Swift (iirc), in which candlemakers petition the government for laws requiring curtains to be closed all through the day, so that people will not unfairly deprive candlemakers of income.
To get a court order they would presumably have to show the the end-user AIX licences have been revoked.
That in turn requires showing that IBM's contract was not eternal, that a revocation flows on to end user licences, that IBM has actually breached the contract, etc etc. You can expect IBM to fairly hotly contest each of those points and more beside.
Basically the whole SCO-IBM court case has to play out before SCO gets to even apply for the court order.
As previously discussed SCO would have the option of applying for a temporary injunction, but they don't seem to have either the cash or the evidence to do that.
As any first-semester law student could tell you, a contract can be formed verbally, or implicitly by action. Contracts do not have to be written and certainly do not have to be witnessed.
Do you really expect to have a written, signed and witnessed contract every time you purchase groceries?
Having a contract in writing and witnessed helps avoid arguments later about exactly what was agreed to, but it is not required by law. (There may be exceptions for some kinds of contracts in some jurisdictions.)
Slashdot Mirror
The GNU people have seemed a little passive on the issue too. How long will it be before SCO "finds" proprietary code in various GNU sources?
The Free Software Foundation has for years had a position that all code donated to their projects must have a written and signed copyright assignment. If you work for company, they have to sign it too.
One reason for this is that if there's any allegation of infringement, the FSF can claim to have made a reasonable effort to prevent it. When the infringing code is pointed out, they'll know who sent it in, and that person is liable. In this case, it might well prove that Caldera/SCO contributed the code in question.
This makes contributing to their projects more hassle than just firing off a patch to somebody else. You have to wait for a piece of paper to physically reach the FSF in Massachusetts and be processed by their clerk. However it may turn out that their caution is justified.
However it's not a perfect protection: SCO haven't produced any evidence, and so counter-evidence is of limited use. Knowing who wrote every line of code is litte help if SCO won't say which lines they dislike. And all the evidence and legal strength in the world won't help against somebody spewing FUD.
Does this professor or university have a name, or are you just trolling?
Would DiDio know copied code if it bit her on the ass? Even if she did, without context that SCO are unwilling to supply (revision histories, mail archives, etc) it is impossible to know which way the copying occurred.
And what's this "group from MIT" that DiDio and SCO refer to? Do they have a name, or is just some random MIT dropouts? Has MIT actually agreed for its name to decorate this shabby confidence trick?
SCO has always claimed that there was a lot of Unix code in recent Linux kernels, hundreds of thousands of lines they claim.
That's simply not true. In earlier interviews, SCO said that "the tainted code is not in the Linux kernel that Linus [Torvalds] and others have helped develop. We're talking about what's on the periphery of the Linux kernel."
That is directly contradicted by their current (incredible) claim that there is hundreds of thousands of lines of their code throughout the kernel.
There is a point at which "evolving your strategy" blends into a liar or con man frantically changing their story.
SCO have operations in a number of other countries. You could in principle sue or take other action against them in the country in which you reside or do business, particularly if SCO's representatives there have made baseless statements that damage your business.
The cases in Australia, Poland, and Germany were all lodged against SCO's local subsidiary, if I understand correctly.
A judgement against SCO in Australia probably won't finish them off, but they don't have a lot of money to lose, and every bit helps.
you do want a quality product at an affordable price, dont you?
:-)
Are we talking about the same IBM?
By all accounts (I haven't worked there) India has enough structural problems that they're giving themselves quite a handicap against the US. Apparently the amount of government paperwork required to accomplish even a trivial task is pretty massive. As a recent Economist article said:
etc
Or a nice cup of frosty piss....
But guess what they were much better of before the white(british) landed there and looted their wealth.(Kohinoor in the british crown.)
Yeah, Indians used to eat diamonds for breakfast every day!
It seems to me that the presence or absence of gemstones would have precisely zero effect on the standard of living of your average person.
The Europians were eating raw food(the british in particular)
Fire was only introduced to Europe from India in the 1500s! Everybody in Europe just used to knaw on raw meat, often without even cutting it off the carcass! I suppose you think all the written recipes dating back to pre-Roman times for cooked food (including herbs and spices) have just been made up to make India look bad?
Ridiculously high, or ridiculously low?
Yes, that's basically the story, except that they've thrown in a few more contradictory claims for good measure, including
5. IBM breached their contract with SCO by promoting Linux, etc etc.
6. Parties (as yet unnamed) copied SCO proprietary source (as yet unidentified) into Linux.
7. IBM unfairly competed with SCO by promoting Linux.
Basically SCO just keep bluffing and upping the ante. Unfortunately for McBridge, IBM (a) knows their bluffing, and (b) has a gun. Random spectators are wondering about "what if they're right?", but the real question is "will they lose their life, or just their shirt?"
incest wrote
Great, I just wrote about porn on Slashdot. That means an extra 7 years of no sex.
Surely with a username like that you're getting plenty at home?
Yep: Valgrind is an automatic fish-barrel shooter. Finding memory bugs is just so easy.
I'd be really sad if I had to work on a platform other than x86 Linux that doesn't have it. In fact, I know people in BSD production environments who develop on Linux specifically so that they can use it.
Of course, if this is set in the 80s presumably it didn't exist yet....
Building with warnings turned on would probably have saved you 40 minutes. (Depending on your compiler.)
If Apple were to lower their prices a bit, they'd likely sell more Macs to folks like me who view their current prices as prohibitive.
You know, the same goes for BMW.
Apple's positioning at the moment is that they don't *want* to sell more Macs to people like you. I say that with all due respect -- they're not selling one to me either at the moment. They're more concerned with offering the best designed and integrated package, even if it's more expensive for the MIPS. I can respect that, even if I'm a cheapskate who'd rather put Debian on an x86 built from parts.
distcc does Objective C and C++. They're just so infrequently used outside of OS X that they're not worth mentioning in the Debian release.
Distributed compilaton of Java is a whole other kettle of fish. I don't think there is any good solution in Xcode or elsewhere.
it won't be of the same caliber as Xcode.
Strangely enough it's exactly the same thing, rebadged, and with some Aqua sugar-coating.
Go away troll.
Yes, the distributed build system is based on distcc. (I'm the distcc author, and I have been speaking to people at Apple.)
There are some Apple-specific hooks to integrate with their IDE and their nonstandard precompiled header system, but it's basically the same.
I applaud Apple for getting in touch early on and seeing what they could do to help with open source development.
Does it check if the libraries and compilers on the machines are producing the same object code?
I'm not sure. That has been a minor problem for distcc, because there is no really satisfactory OS/distribution independent way to check the versions of compilers and tool chains. (Red Hat users will recall that sometimes 2.96 aint 2.96). Because Apple know all the gritty details of OS/compiler versioning they can check this.
Thanks!
There is a switch -msse2 to enable it. There was no good reason for Apple to have SSE2 disabled, other than to cripple the competition.
On the contrary, some versions of gcc produce buggy code in particular cases with SSE2 enabled. I'm not saying this necessarily did or didn't apply to Apple's tests, but it is possible there was a valid reason to turn it off.
Oh, I remember him. Talk about clueless! On a bad day he could barely remember his own name. :-)
I'm sure that's frustrating, but I wouldn't stress too much about it. Military people are generally pretty conservative about technology, with some notable exceptions. If Linux continues to improve and has good commercial support and ex-military people in suits to make the pitch then I think they'll come around.
Meanwhile, some nameless Australian agencies are buying HP Linux machines literally by the truckload. It's good to see.
It's funny that you should use that example. There is a wonderful old satire by Swift (iirc), in which candlemakers petition the government for laws requiring curtains to be closed all through the day, so that people will not unfairly deprive candlemakers of income.
To get a court order they would presumably have to show the the end-user AIX licences have been revoked.
That in turn requires showing that IBM's contract was not eternal, that a revocation flows on to end user licences, that IBM has actually breached the contract, etc etc. You can expect IBM to fairly hotly contest each of those points and more beside.
Basically the whole SCO-IBM court case has to play out before SCO gets to even apply for the court order.
As previously discussed SCO would have the option of applying for a temporary injunction, but they don't seem to have either the cash or the evidence to do that.
Don't be silly.
As any first-semester law student could tell you, a contract can be formed verbally, or implicitly by action. Contracts do not have to be written and certainly do not have to be witnessed.
Do you really expect to have a written, signed and witnessed contract every time you purchase groceries?
Having a contract in writing and witnessed helps avoid arguments later about exactly what was agreed to, but it is not required by law. (There may be exceptions for some kinds of contracts in some jurisdictions.)
Go away troll.
all Shuttle passengers have been NASA Astronauts and Russian Cosmonauts
Uh, no. There have been at least one Australian and one Israeli passenger on the shuttle, and probably other nationalities.