| |||||||||||||
Don't LaughDon't LaughPosted Feb 18, 2004 20:35 UTC (Wed) by Spike (guest, #14160)Parent article: SCO OpenServer Update Pack 2 Hey they finally put in USB 1.1 support !! I've been dying for this. ;^)
(Log in to post comments)
Don't Laugh Posted Feb 18, 2004 23:27 UTC (Wed) by ken (subscriber, #625) [Link] amazing they still have people competent enough to actually do that work.
They don't have people competent enough to do the work Posted Feb 19, 2004 3:39 UTC (Thu) by leonbrooks (guest, #1494) [Link] UnixWare, at least, appears to have stolen and adapted mucho code from SuSE Enterprise Linux 8 in order to stay afloat - which only makes sense if you view the GPL as unconstitutional [that page tells a direct lie - their Unices are both legally encumbered by Novell's ownership of the System V code they're based on - and two half-truths but they've ignored requests to take it down] and somehow twist the consequences of that from "and therefore we can't distrubute any GPLed software" to "and therefore we can do what we please with GPLed software".How shocking would it be if their OpenServer team turned out to have done likewise?
They don't have people competent enough to do the work Posted Feb 19, 2004 5:13 UTC (Thu) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link] > view the GPL as unconstitutionalGPL in only unconstitutional if it is not in SCO's best interest on that particular day, for a particular piece of software and such. That is to say, SCO is allowed to take free software (e.g. Samba, bash, gcc) and distribute it under the GPL. In that case GPL is valid. Anyone else is violating the constitution (no less!) by doing the same. In case you're wondering where all this comes from, it all in the "SCO Copyright Act 2003", as written by Darl, Heise and cohorts ;-) They are going to have a rude awakening when they find themselves in trouble over GPL violations. I'm getting the feeling IBM had enough of the "AIX is ours" crap from SCO...
|
|||||||||||||