Mostly standards-related header files, about 200 lines from.c files (some of which never hit the mainstream kernel, some of which are already obselete, some of which were distributed by Caldera themselves). No copyright claims any more. No trade-secret claims any more. It's down to breach of contract against IBM.
Most telling is that none of the code listed is from TSG, OpenServer or UnixWare, it's all IBM-authored code and the entire gambit rests on the breach-of-contract details.
By the time TSG is done, the stigma associated with having been "a SCO dealer" is going to be a significant business liability. D'ohl still thinks he's got a chance of bottling and selling Linux, the madman, and as another SCO reseller commented, there's nothing in D'ohl's plans which builds his business.
I want to see a cartoon of D'ohl holding up an exploded plastic water bottle, with an angry Tux emerging from it with wide-open fang-encrusted beak, poised to exact a terrible revenge for his incarceration. Any takers?
Stephen Evans has made some significant factual errors in his story "Linux cyber-battle turns nasty" and may be exposing the BBC by his consequent assertions.
"There seems little doubt that SCO was targeted" as a distraction to the virus, apparently written by and for commercial spammers. Its primary intent is to act as a relay for spreading more of those intrusive offers of larger penises and mortgage solutions.
The virus is indeed about malice, and it was not written by the creative, constructive Open Source community. It has been traced back to Russian spammers.
It does not appear that www.sco.com was attacked in anger. The name had been taken out of circulation before the due date, and the site http://sco.com/ was reachable throughout, as were the sco.com email servers, hosted nearby. It seems that The SCO Group (TSG) are crying "wolf" yet again.
TSG have been accusing the authors of Linux of stealing their ideas, and their code. IBM is being accused of giving TSG's code away (despite IBM's licence agreement plainly stating that they can sell or give away derivatives), and being asked for over $3 billion in "damages", yet TSG won't tell anyone exactly what was "stolen".
Their story keeps changing, and whenever more exact information has been leaked, the code has consistently turned out to be either written by somebody else, or public domain.
Darl MacBride wants to sell Linux as others sell bottled water, which is fine because Red Hat, Mandrake and other companies do just that. He wants to do it not by bottling better water, but by making the harvesting of rain and spring water heavily taxable.
Undertandably, the people who've built the software equivalent of dams and rainwater tanks are outraged at his barratry, false claims and blackmail. TSG is not "raising the possibility of internet blackmail", TSG is carrying it out!
The Open Source community's response has been to provide evidence of TSG's insanity, not to write viruses. None of the computers bearing the virus run Linux. Zero. Nada. Not one.
It is impossible to read Stephen's story without interpreting it as "Linux community members attacked a helpless corporation", which as a member of the Linux community I find insulting and hurtful.
I require a retraction from the BBC and a public apology from Stephen. I also want his word that he'll not carelessly abuse a news service to pillory the champions of freedom and fair play ever again.
Forcing Microsoft to leave the customers at a point where they are offered a clear choice, rather than dumping them into a complete spiderweb where it repidly becomes increasingly difficult for them to choose a competitor.
Unbundling it means that customers have to take steps to get stuff, at which point they then have a choice of getting Microsoft stuff like IE or getting something like FireBird which isn't so inclined to go phishing while your back's turned.
It's still not enough. Microsoft still get to keep the profits from their profiteering. In Australia, looters are quite often shot. In the USA, it seems, they get a pat on the back from Dubya's administration.
And 100G$ is spare change for Microsoft. If someone fined me a fifth of a percent of my current savings, would I be in tears?
In the USA, they didn't even get that. Poor, poor, much-maligned Microsoft, the indignities they have to put up with... my heart bleeds for them.</sarcasm>
This was twenty-odd years ago, in Paraburdoo. Cat would pretend to be dead, lying in the hot, hot sun until a crow got to the point of actually reaching out to have just a little... BLAM! rude shock. Same cat would regularly beat up and chase away quite large dogs. Never seemed to fight with ours, though.
But... I bet the Austrians have some kangaroos tucked away in a zoo somewhere, to satisfy tourists who mistype their destinations. I know we've got the oddstonecastle tucked away in case the misreading goes the other way. (-:
...because not enough birds are killed by them. How long d'ya reckon it'll be before someone organises the real-world equivalent of a Google-bombing to correct that oversight?
...they really did recommend using ME in place of 98. They said that the drivers often worked better under ME, but perhaps they were just encouraging me to roll the dice at a different angle (think: reboot, and if that fails, reinstall).
It works kinda sorta under WINE. Note that the first link is over a year old, and that a lot of things (e.g. PhotoShop) have started working really well in the last few snapshots.
"Your honour, we're not a monopoly! Our code is so crappy that there will always be a fringe market supplying modular replacements that actually work."
Thanks for the link, I'll use that when they update. How does your stuff go under WINE?
And if it's not (sufficiently) broken, don't fix it.
My favourite tale from MS-Windows XP, if you want currency, is a mate's laptop. One day after a reboot (which involved no network fiddling), it decided that the loopback device needed to obtain an address automatically. Due to a dearth of DHCP servers advertising on the loopback interface, it chose a number in the 169.254.*.* range. Some services find out what the loopback interface's address is and connect to that, and they were unperturbed. Some services connect to "localhost" so could be "fixed" with an entry in the hosts file. But some worked through 127.0.0.1 and they promptly became sad.
Setting the address to static was fine, but we couldn't set it back to 127.0.0.1 because that was a reserved address, explained the helpful GUI. We eventually worked around it by setting the address to 127.0.0.2, which is a bit of a headsmacker because there's no point in forbidding 127.0.0.1 if you don't also forbid 127.*.*.* since the loopback interface accepts all traffic in that range.
BTW, this particular loopback interface was even more voracious than that: experiment determined that it was accepting any packets routed to the interface, regardless of address.
This was all by the by eventually anyway, since XP (following in the best '98 style), eventually burped and trashed the entire drive.
I have one customer who uses AutoCAD and therefore (until recently, anyway) MS-Windows. Machine A, running MS-Windows 98, plots fine. Machine B, running MS-Windows 98 (and the same versions of everything) refuses to plot to the same (LAN-connected) plotter.
AutoDesk advise upgrading to Windows ME, so B is duly upgraded, and fails, and is wiped and reinstalled, and works. Hurrah! Both machines can plot.
Management now decides to shoot for homogeneity, so upgrades to ME on A as well... and it stops plotting. Wipe and reinstall doesn't help. Wipe and revert to 98 does.
Your DOS apps will be asking "What USB?" when you run them safely isolated from reality. Now I have to find a working 5.25" floppy drive so I can have a go at getting my old DOS games back. You can print to file, take screenshots of games with no native screenshot capability, use devices like USB optical mice or graphics tablets that the game authors never even dreamed about.
Slashdot Mirror
...as in, when "I get out of jail, I'm gunna be on the d'ohl for life".
Kelvin! You get to freeze your beehive off at 273 degrees!
SCOX stock price, meet Mr Floor?
Most telling is that none of the code listed is from TSG, OpenServer or UnixWare, it's all IBM-authored code and the entire gambit rests on the breach-of-contract details.
Cue "Funeral March for a Marionette"...
Either way.. goodbye, case!
By the time TSG is done, the stigma associated with having been "a SCO dealer" is going to be a significant business liability. D'ohl still thinks he's got a chance of bottling and selling Linux, the madman, and as another SCO reseller commented, there's nothing in D'ohl's plans which builds his business.
I want to see a cartoon of D'ohl holding up an exploded plastic water bottle, with an angry Tux emerging from it with wide-open fang-encrusted beak, poised to exact a terrible revenge for his incarceration. Any takers?
Stephen Evans has made some significant factual errors in his story "Linux cyber-battle turns nasty" and may be exposing the BBC by his consequent assertions.
"There seems little doubt that SCO was targeted" as a distraction to the virus, apparently written by and for commercial spammers. Its primary intent is to act as a relay for spreading more of those intrusive offers of larger penises and mortgage solutions.
The virus is indeed about malice, and it was not written by the creative, constructive Open Source community. It has been traced back to Russian spammers.
It does not appear that www.sco.com was attacked in anger. The name had been taken out of circulation before the due date, and the site http://sco.com/ was reachable throughout, as were the sco.com email servers, hosted nearby. It seems that The SCO Group (TSG) are crying "wolf" yet again.
TSG have been accusing the authors of Linux of stealing their ideas, and their code. IBM is being accused of giving TSG's code away (despite IBM's licence agreement plainly stating that they can sell or give away derivatives), and being asked for over $3 billion in "damages", yet TSG won't tell anyone exactly what was "stolen".
Their story keeps changing, and whenever more exact information has been leaked, the code has consistently turned out to be either written by somebody else, or public domain.
Darl MacBride wants to sell Linux as others sell bottled water, which is fine because Red Hat, Mandrake and other companies do just that. He wants to do it not by bottling better water, but by making the harvesting of rain and spring water heavily taxable.
Undertandably, the people who've built the software equivalent of dams and rainwater tanks are outraged at his barratry, false claims and blackmail. TSG is not "raising the possibility of internet blackmail", TSG is carrying it out!
The Open Source community's response has been to provide evidence of TSG's insanity, not to write viruses. None of the computers bearing the virus run Linux. Zero. Nada. Not one.
It is impossible to read Stephen's story without interpreting it as "Linux community members attacked a helpless corporation", which as a member of the Linux community I find insulting and hurtful.
I require a retraction from the BBC and a public apology from Stephen. I also want his word that he'll not carelessly abuse a news service to pillory the champions of freedom and fair play ever again.
Forcing Microsoft to leave the customers at a point where they are offered a clear choice, rather than dumping them into a complete spiderweb where it repidly becomes increasingly difficult for them to choose a competitor.
Unbundling it means that customers have to take steps to get stuff, at which point they then have a choice of getting Microsoft stuff like IE or getting something like FireBird which isn't so inclined to go phishing while your back's turned.
It's still not enough. Microsoft still get to keep the profits from their profiteering. In Australia, looters are quite often shot. In the USA, it seems, they get a pat on the back from Dubya's administration.
...in promulgating a monopoly. Microsoft have.
And 100G$ is spare change for Microsoft. If someone fined me a fifth of a percent of my current savings, would I be in tears?
In the USA, they didn't even get that. Poor, poor, much-maligned Microsoft, the indignities they have to put up with... my heart bleeds for them.</sarcasm>
...happy that emus don't fly. (-:
This was twenty-odd years ago, in Paraburdoo. Cat would pretend to be dead, lying in the hot, hot sun until a crow got to the point of actually reaching out to have just a little... BLAM! rude shock. Same cat would regularly beat up and chase away quite large dogs. Never seemed to fight with ours, though.
But... I bet the Austrians have some kangaroos tucked away in a zoo somewhere, to satisfy tourists who mistype their destinations. I know we've got the odd stone castle tucked away in case the misreading goes the other way. (-:
...because not enough birds are killed by them. How long d'ya reckon it'll be before someone organises the real-world equivalent of a Google-bombing to correct that oversight?
:-)
(Cue gun-rights flamewar, grin, duck, run
...perhaps we should ask Bernard Blackham or Trent Lloyd about it.
on both ME and 98. More often it goes all wonky and gracelessly flies into the deck, so they have some warning and can save.
...they really did recommend using ME in place of 98. They said that the drivers often worked better under ME, but perhaps they were just encouraging me to roll the dice at a different angle (think: reboot, and if that fails, reinstall).
When they started this, there was no MS-Windows 2000.
It works kinda sorta under WINE. Note that the first link is over a year old, and that a lot of things (e.g. PhotoShop) have started working really well in the last few snapshots.
"Your honour, we're not a monopoly! Our code is so crappy that there will always be a fringe market supplying modular replacements that actually work."
Thanks for the link, I'll use that when they update. How does your stuff go under WINE?
And if it's not (sufficiently) broken, don't fix it.
My favourite tale from MS-Windows XP, if you want currency, is a mate's laptop. One day after a reboot (which involved no network fiddling), it decided that the loopback device needed to obtain an address automatically. Due to a dearth of DHCP servers advertising on the loopback interface, it chose a number in the 169.254.*.* range. Some services find out what the loopback interface's address is and connect to that, and they were unperturbed. Some services connect to "localhost" so could be "fixed" with an entry in the hosts file. But some worked through 127.0.0.1 and they promptly became sad.
Setting the address to static was fine, but we couldn't set it back to 127.0.0.1 because that was a reserved address, explained the helpful GUI. We eventually worked around it by setting the address to 127.0.0.2, which is a bit of a headsmacker because there's no point in forbidding 127.0.0.1 if you don't also forbid 127.*.*.* since the loopback interface accepts all traffic in that range.
BTW, this particular loopback interface was even more voracious than that: experiment determined that it was accepting any packets routed to the interface, regardless of address.
This was all by the by eventually anyway, since XP (following in the best '98 style), eventually burped and trashed the entire drive.
High compression, good quality, no DRM albatross around its neck. What more could you want?
I have one customer who uses AutoCAD and therefore (until recently, anyway) MS-Windows. Machine A, running MS-Windows 98, plots fine. Machine B, running MS-Windows 98 (and the same versions of everything) refuses to plot to the same (LAN-connected) plotter.
AutoDesk advise upgrading to Windows ME, so B is duly upgraded, and fails, and is wiped and reinstalled, and works. Hurrah! Both machines can plot.
Management now decides to shoot for homogeneity, so upgrades to ME on A as well... and it stops plotting. Wipe and reinstall doesn't help. Wipe and revert to 98 does.
Exit one technician, stage left, screaming.
Your DOS apps will be asking "What USB?" when you run them safely isolated from reality. Now I have to find a working 5.25" floppy drive so I can have a go at getting my old DOS games back. You can print to file, take screenshots of games with no native screenshot capability, use devices like USB optical mice or graphics tablets that the game authors never even dreamed about.
Something like... M'aud'ib! -ib! -IB! -IB! -*-KABOOM-*- ! (-: