Sponsored link
Vyatta –
Linux & Open Source
Alternative to Cisco –
Advanced Routing,
Firewall, VPN, QoS..
Free Download ->
| |||||||||||
SCO is still distributing the Linux kernelSCO is still distributing the Linux kernelPosted May 15, 2003 6:54 UTC (Thu) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330)Parent article: SCO suspends, Gartner warns The Linux kernel is still available from ftp.caldera.com; for instance, see ftp://ftp.caldera.com/pub/scolinux/server/4.0/updates/SRPMS/
(Log in to post comments)
SCO is still distributing the Linux kernel Posted May 15, 2003 15:23 UTC (Thu) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link] There is no kernel source there. Note that the kernel packages have "nosrc" in them. The best thing I could find is this 2.4.13 kernel package which actually includes the sources.
SCO is still distributing the Linux kernel Posted May 15, 2003 16:21 UTC (Thu) by metacircles (guest, #8895) [Link] There is no kernel source there. Note that the kernel packages have "nosrc" in them.If those packages contain kernel binaries and there's no corresponding source, that falls foul of the GPL section 3. Perhaps the kernel's copyright holders want to take this up with SCO?
SCO is still distributing the Linux kernel Posted May 16, 2003 2:50 UTC (Fri) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link] I don't see how this would violate GPL. GPL doesn't require the sources to be distibuted electronically and be available to everyone. I think it's assumed that the users who need the update already have the source from the original distribution.
SCO is still distributing the Linux kernel Posted May 16, 2003 9:36 UTC (Fri) by error27 (subscriber, #8346) [Link] GPL doesn't require the sources to be distibuted electronicallyTrue. and be available to everyone. If you distribute code with source then you do not have to make it available to everyone. However, if you do not distribute source then you have to make the code available to anyone who asks within three years. Any way, in this case they are distributing the object files to everyone from a public ftp server and so they have to make the source available to everyone. I think it's assumed that the users who need the update already have the source from the original distribution. The GPL calls for "a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code". Patches probably don't qualify as complete. This is all coverred in the paragraphs 3a and 3b of the GPL.
SCO is still distributing the Linux kernel Posted May 15, 2003 19:02 UTC (Thu) by lyda (guest, #7429) [Link] sco is not violating the license of "the community." they're violating the license of linus torvalds and the other copyright holders.it's up to them to sue sco. we can help - as can redhat, suse, the fsf and others. obviously this assumes the kernel is the only infringing part. the more gpl software sco claims infringes, the more copyright holders can defend their work. and they should sue sco. it's their license being violated.
SCO is still distributing the Linux kernel Posted May 16, 2003 9:50 UTC (Fri) by error27 (subscriber, #8346) [Link] If SCO distributes GPL software on its ftp server, the people who download the software are entitled to the source code. If SCO refuses to provide the source, then the users have the right to sue SCO to obtain it.The copyright holders have a particular cause to sue, but the users have been wronged by SCO's license violation as well.
|
|||||||||||