SGI's Letter to the Linux community - SGI

This is a discussion on SGI's Letter to the Linux community - SGI ; All, Sorry if I've missed the boat on this one, due to using google groups and seeing stuff late, but I assume you've all seen this: http://oss.sgi.com/letter_100103.txt Seems some of SGI's contributions to Linux were slightly questionable, but they have ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: SGI's Letter to the Linux community

  1. SGI's Letter to the Linux community

    All,

    Sorry if I've missed the boat on this one, due to using google groups
    and seeing stuff late, but I assume you've all seen this:

    http://oss.sgi.com/letter_100103.txt

    Seems some of SGI's contributions to Linux were slightly questionable,
    but they have since been removed. It also calls SCO's claims over XFS
    "completely misplaced" and SCO's position "absurd".

    It seems SGI have been very thorough about reviewing the code and the
    terms of their UNIX license, they even go as far as to cite specific
    files and routines.

    Nice one SGI!

    James

  2. Re: SGI's Letter to the Linux community

    On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, James Holden wrote:

    > Sorry if I've missed the boat on this one, due to using google groups
    > and seeing stuff late, but I assume you've all seen this:
    >
    > http://oss.sgi.com/letter_100103.txt
    >
    > Seems some of SGI's contributions to Linux were slightly questionable,
    > but they have since been removed. It also calls SCO's claims over XFS
    > "completely misplaced" and SCO's position "absurd".


    Between travel and the damage resulting from hurricane Juan, I've
    been "offline" for more than a week, so I didn't see this letter
    until your posting -- thanks.

    > It seems SGI have been very thorough about reviewing the code and the
    > terms of their UNIX license, they even go as far as to cite specific
    > files and routines.


    The letter states: "The three code fragments had been inadvertently
    included and in fact were redundant from the start. We found better
    replacements providing the same functionality already available in the
    Linux kernel."

    SCO clearly put a lot of effort into searching linux sources for grotty
    old SysV code. What a wonderful system that allows your enemies to
    improve the code by searching out grotty bits of code for you! You'd
    think SCO would be embarrassed to admit that SysV relies on such stuff.
    Of course, their lawyers will claim this grotty code a) is not public
    domain and b) was key to the substitution of free linux for their
    commercial unix and therefore that SCO should recover damages. If they
    get away with this you could be sued for theft after stepping on dog poop
    left on a public sidewalk -- clearly if you stepped on it you weren't
    being diligent.

    --
    George N. White III


  3. Re: SGI's Letter to the Linux community

    James Holden wrote:
    > All,


    > http://oss.sgi.com/letter_100103.txt


    > Seems some of SGI's contributions to Linux were slightly questionable,


    They were. A real contribution to Linux would be the sterilization of
    it's user base to prevent further spread of this 21st century plague.

    cheers.


  4. Re: SGI's Letter to the Linux community

    On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 16:16:47 GMT,
    The Linux AntiChrist , in
    <1065544337.358182@rh9cache2> wrote:
    +> James Holden wrote:
    +> > All,
    +>
    +> > http://oss.sgi.com/letter_100103.txt
    +>
    +> > Seems some of SGI's contributions to Linux were slightly questionable,
    +>
    +> They were. A real contribution to Linux would be the sterilization of
    +> it's user base to prevent further spread of this 21st century plague.

    Does that include SGI?

    James
    --
    Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC
    I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow
    isn't looking good, either.
    I am BOFH. Resistance is futile. Your network will be assimilated.

  5. Re: SGI's Letter to the Linux community

    The Linux AntiChrist wrote:
    > James Holden wrote:
    >
    >>All,

    >
    >
    >>http://oss.sgi.com/letter_100103.txt

    >
    >
    >>Seems some of SGI's contributions to Linux were slightly questionable,

    >
    >
    > They were. A real contribution to Linux would be the sterilization of
    > it's user base to prevent further spread of this 21st century plague.
    >
    > cheers.
    >


    Well, I'm undecided on my stance on Linux. I have only one i386 type
    machine, and it runs Debian. It's only use is doing number crunching
    type work, like video compression after I've edited it on my O2. That
    and making my USB stuff work (scanner and digital camera). It's got the
    raw CPU and (modern) connectivity that my SGI's lack.

    Much as I'd love to use SGI kit for everything everywhere, it's just not
    practical all the time. Commodity PC hardware is cheap and reliable
    enough (for webserving etc...) but I'd not put Linux on a production
    box. My colo box runs OpenBSD, which, IMHO, kicks ass.

    At least Linux is making inroads into Windows territory, and with big
    companies like SGI behind it that's good. Linux is better than Windows,
    but that doesn't mean that Linux is the best you can get. Anything that
    pushes Windows out of the picture is worthy of praise as far as I'm
    concerned.

    My real passion lies with SGI/IRIX, but I'm still an active member of my
    local Linux user group, giving talks and organising events.

    Just my two pence worth.

    James


+ Reply to Thread