Please stop worrying and educate yourself. This is just muddying up the mail list and the topic.
All this angst is easily dispelled. Consider this quote from the article below: "SCO/Caldera's claim to own the scalability techniques certainly cannot be supported from the feature list of its own SCO OpenServer, a genetic Unix. The latest version[43] advertises SMP up to only 4 processors (a level which SCO's complaint dismisses as inadequate), no LVM, no NUMA, and no hot-swapping. That is, SCO/Caldera is alleging that IBM misappropriated from SCO technologies which do not appear in SCO's own product." How can IBM steal something SCO doesn't have? Here is the article: http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.html A couple of other good items to look at: http://www.cybersource.com.au/users/conz/linux_vs_sco_matrix.html http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO_v._IBM_Linux_lawsuit "From the moment that SCO distributed that code under the GNU General Public License, they would have given everybody in the world the right to copy, modify and distribute that code freely," ... "From the moment SCO distributed the Linux kernel under GPL, they licensed the use. Always. That's what our license says." "I allege that SCO is full of it, and that the Linux process is already the most transparent process in the whole industry. Let's face it, nobody else even comes close to being as good at showing the evolution and source of every single line of code out there." - Linus "As to its trade secret claims, which are the only claims actually made in the lawsuit against IBM, there remains the simple fact that SCO has for years distributed copies of the kernel, Linux, as part of GNU/Linux free software systems. [...] There is simply no legal basis on which SCO can claim trade secret liability in others for material it widely and commercially published itself under a license that specifically permitted unrestricted copying and distribution." And a very comprehensive (not for the faint of heart or the un-obssessive): http://sco.iwethey.org/ Not taking time to understand the issue contributes to the FUD. Please take the time to read these resources. I'd be pleased if others on this list can provide better insight or knowledge than these articles, but I'd also be very surprised. RTFM, please. Cheers, Bret On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 17:20, Jody Grafals wrote: > I make a living (a meager one) building Linux server with debian for > small businesses. I have never needed to build a multi CPU system so I > always remove the systematic multiprocessing stuff from the kernel when > I build, shouldn’t this be good enough ? Going back to 2.2 would be a > nightmare......... :-( > > Any thougths ? > > > Brian McGroarty wrote: > > >On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 08:26:49AM -0400, Rich Johnson wrote: > > > > > >>I guess I'll be going back to 2.2 until this nonsense blows > >>over....sigh. > >> > >> > > > >For a business, I'd just check to be sure that 2.2 will be okay for > >your needs. But I wouldn't step back to 2.2 until SCO actually makes > >the claims public. > > > >If you're an individual, I'd definitely wait. I'd expect a long period > >of SCO waving its paper swords and grandstanding before they get to > >showing the specific alleged violations. > > > > > > > > > -- bwaldow at alum.mit.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
