It strikes me that SCO would show their best example. This is it?!?!? Hoary old code from 1973 that's been all over the net for three decades and is released under a license that allows the Linux developers to use it with impunity? If this is their best example, they are bound to lose.
However, the Heise article says (my translation):
Supposedly, around 700 critical lines of code for SMP-technology drifted from Unix into Linux releases 2.4 and 2.5. In total, SCO's testers are supposed to have found over 800000 lines of duplicated program code - an example from SCO is shown in the picture right (enlarged view).
i.e. that was just one example, chosen by Heise. If even 1% of what SCO says is true, this could get very nasty for IBM and/or Linux in general. <flame suit on>
Maybe we'll one day see the FSF sue the arses of the any programmers who stole code and signed false copyright assignment forms. You can see the text of one of those here. It includes this:
The Assigner hereby represents and warrants that it is the sole copyright holder for the Work and that it has the right and power to enter into this contract. The Assigner hereby indemnify and hold harmless the Foundation, its officers, employees, and agents against any and all claims, actions or damages (including attorney's reasonable fees) asserted by or paid to any party on account of a breach or alleged breach of the foregoing warranty.
That's only true for the java stuff. As far as I
know, the compiler+libraries used for
- C
- C++
- Objective C
- Fortran
- Ada
are LGPL'd (please correct me if not) and free of
the following issue seen on a mailing list:
The C++ library code is covered by the full-blown GPL with some additional rights. Quoting from fstream.cc:
As a special exception, you may use this file as part of a free software library without restriction. Specifically, if other files instantiate templates or use macros or inline functions from this file, or you compile this file and link it with other files to produce an executable, this file does not by itself cause the resulting executable to be covered by the GNU General Public License. This exception does not however invalidate any other reasons why the executable file might be covered by the GNU General Public License.
I haven't ever asked a lawyer, but I believe I can legally redistribute executables created by g++ that include libstdc++ code. It's not the LGPL, though.
in order to avoid shutting down my entire system just to do a quick check that app XYZ still compiles and runs natively on FreeBSD.
I haven't used it, but I think the Bochs PC emulator claims to do what you want. I've only heard of it because it has recently been in the sourceforge top ten downloads list. Here's a link to it.
back in '88 or so, I built a parallel-port D/A converter and wrote some DOS drivers for it (in *assembler*, baby). It produced pretty good sound quality, after downloading some 12-bit samples from a borrowed MIDI sampler - beat the hell out of trying to modulate the PC speaker by switching it on or off at about 100kHz.
I've been reading (slowly) the book "The Symbolic Species" by Terrence W. Deacon, which covers the evolution of language in humans. It goes into the selective pressures that could have worked in favour of language development. Without these, any single mutation would not have gone very far towards our current language abilities. You can check out a summary of the book here.
Slashdot Mirror
It strikes me that SCO would show their best example. This is it?!?!? Hoary old code from 1973 that's been all over the net for three decades and is released under a license that allows the Linux developers to use it with impunity? If this is their best example, they are bound to lose.
However, the Heise article says (my translation):
Supposedly, around 700 critical lines of code for SMP-technology drifted from Unix into Linux releases 2.4 and 2.5. In total, SCO's testers are supposed to have found over 800000 lines of duplicated program code - an example from SCO is shown in the picture right (enlarged view).
i.e. that was just one example, chosen by Heise. If even 1% of what SCO says is true, this could get very nasty for IBM and/or Linux in general. <flame suit on>
Maybe we'll one day see the FSF sue the arses of the any programmers who stole code and signed false copyright assignment forms. You can see the text of one of those here. It includes this:
The Assigner hereby represents and warrants that it is the sole copyright holder for the Work and that it has the right and power to enter into this contract. The Assigner hereby indemnify and hold harmless the Foundation, its officers, employees, and agents against any and all claims, actions or damages (including attorney's reasonable fees) asserted by or paid to any party on account of a breach or alleged breach of the foregoing warranty.
Be afraid, be very afraid...
The C++ library code is covered by the full-blown GPL with some additional rights. Quoting from fstream.cc:
I haven't ever asked a lawyer, but I believe I can legally redistribute executables created by g++ that include libstdc++ code. It's not the LGPL, though.in order to avoid shutting down my entire system just to do a quick check that app XYZ still compiles and runs natively on FreeBSD.
I haven't used it, but I think the Bochs PC emulator claims to do what you want. I've only heard of it because it has recently been in the sourceforge top ten downloads list. Here's a link to it.
back in '88 or so, I built a parallel-port D/A converter and wrote some DOS drivers for it (in *assembler*, baby). It produced pretty good sound quality, after downloading some 12-bit samples from a borrowed MIDI sampler - beat the hell out of trying to modulate the PC speaker by switching it on or off at about 100kHz.
I've been reading (slowly) the book "The Symbolic Species" by Terrence W. Deacon, which covers the evolution of language in humans. It goes into the selective pressures that could have worked in favour of language development. Without these, any single mutation would not have gone very far towards our current language abilities. You can check out a summary of the book here.