Posted on 01/18/2005 11:40:57 AM PST by N3WBI3
Open Source Development Labs has reportedly rejected reports it is leading a revision of the Linux Kernel to remove code that might infringe software patents
Open Source Development Labs (OSDL), which promotes the adoption of the Linux operating system, has denied that it plans to rewrite the Linux kernel to combat claims that it infringes some software patents.
Linux Business Week reported last week that, according to "informed sources", the OSDL, Intel, IBM, the state of Oregon and the city of Beaverton are part of a consortium that will rewrite the parts of the Linux kernel that allegedly infringe patents. It said that the project, called "Operation Open Gates", aims to stop Microsoft from scaring customers off Linux by claiming that the operating system infringes patents.
In recent months, Microsoft has used the threat of IP infringement as part of its battle against Linux. In October 2004, Microsoft chief executive Steve Ballmer claimed in an executive email that Windows was a better choice than Linux because it provides protection against legal action over patent violations. A month later, at Microsoft's Asian Government Leaders Forum in Singapore, Ballmer claimed that Linux violates more than 228 patents and that organisations will be at risk of legal action if they use Linux.
But the OSDL has denied that it is planning to rewrite parts of the kernel. According to online news site NewsForge, OSDL officials have said that the report was not accurate, and that while Beaverton is putting $1.2m into economic development around open source software this is not connected to rewriting the Linux kernel.
The OSDL was not available for comment at the time of writing.
I don't really differentiate between the kernal and what it takes to talk to the kernal. Pretty much, to me, the UI is the OS. And if it's an obnoxious UI it's an obnoxious OS.
Which is why I'm building a golden idol to Bill Gates, our Savior from the evil comic book guys and unix in all of its evil forms.
Today I had to figure out how to make a bigger file and I learned that I need to know what a "stanza" is for chsec. Of course, the comic book guy who wrote the man file doesn't say. And nowhere in my googling did I find out what a stanza is, except for what I already know, a section of poetry.
The only poetry in linux is when it finally gets all the launch codes and destroys itself by destroying all of us. Even that's not poetic but there'll be no obnoxious comic book guys around afterward to argue the point.
DEATH TO UNIX! LONG LIVE THE NEW FLESH.
Yea thats why I stopped nelieving MS, after they gave their code to communist murderers for a few $'s...
Dude, that's heavy-duty. LOL
As for the usual meaning of "stanza" in the context of computing: it will be a set of related parameters grouped under a header in a configuration file. Windows has them -- .ini files are arranged this way. [header] followed by relevant parms.
But if you're using chsec, you must be in AIX. AAAAAUGH!
Ok, what they're talking about: in AIX, those security files are arranged in stanzas. If you open one, say /etc/security/passwd, you'll see that it's a long succession of clots of parameters, each one grouped under a username. Those groups are the stanzas. The name of the relevant one is what the chsec command is looking for after the "-s".
I always thought the Motif version of smit was cute, with its "running man" progress indicator. If the command succeeded, the little man would stop running and signal "touchdown", but if it failed, he would fall on his face. You could even see the dust flying up where he hit.
smit wasn't letting me do that. couldn't find anything about max size, only allow large files. Eventually I found I could change the max size on the only file system that allowed large files, but only as root and as soon as I switched back to my normal user, the limit went back to default.
It was just one big mess. But then so is unix.
If you microphobic comic book guys hate MS so much, why not make an OS people would want to use instead of something older and more confusing Phylis Diller? (l)unix needs a top to bottom overhaul and a 21st century spin on what an OS is, instead of a 1968 on.
Spider-Man was great in the 1960's but he needed to be updated to bring to the big screen, ye ken? MS will continue to roar because they can at least offer people the illusion of what they want and all you comic book guys can say is "worst os ever" but we all know you're comic book guys and we just roll our eyes and double click on the icon that starts Doom3.
Ye are all bin playing ketchup for nearly a decade with your feared MS and by clinging to the past and living in fear, ye are only lagging further behind and isolating yourself from the people ye should be winning over is MS is the evil you claim it is.
l(unix) is for loons who like to read long, boring, uninformative man files. MS is for people who want to get stuff done and don't want to worry about swap space. I know ye wont ken, 'cause ye have yer original version of unix in a mylar bag on a shelf and wont even allow anyone to look at it, lest their gaze somehow penetrate the mylar and make yer precious less valuble, even though it is worthless.
But it sounded like what you wanted was to set the ulimit for a particular user account. You can set it to unlimited. In smit, you set "soft file size" equal to -1, and that user is now unlimited. Gotta be root, of course.
I offer no comment on the comics, because I never did read them, and have no opinion in the matter. I have programmed both on windows and various unixes, and other os's besides, so I do hold rather firm opinions on that subject, that I cannot deny.
They gave them a peek, at some of the code, for a cost. You give them all the code, for their supercomputers, for free. Quite a difference.
Yes we did not trade money for a peek at the most used OS in the world to communist thugs...
Nope, you'd rather just give it to them for free. I bet the ribbon was red.
So, with open source anythinf they do to the code we get back, all we get from MS is a rope to hang ourselves infront of Bill Gate communist masters..
I believe that's what Apple did, use a NIX base (BSD in this case) to create an OS much more usable and less confusing than Windows, but still with the power of NIX underneath.
You worry about the national security risks of the Chinese getting hold of software, but it's okay as long as Microsoft made money off of it. Apparently everything has a price.
I don't believe in exporting any technology to China. Food is all they deserve so long as they are communist. So IMO they get nothing. If they get anything in technology, it should have a huge price, and be subject to monitoring, in line with export control laws (prior to Clinton revoking most every one we had on the last day of his presidency).
Your plan? Give em everything they want. For free, and a license to copy, modify, resell, and use in any which way they see fit, including to power their supercomputers for nuclear weapons design.
You can argue the point, but it's obvious who's the Chinese stooge.
IMHO AIX is probably the weakest UNIX ever (though I have never used HP-UX)..
make an OS people would want to use instead of something older and more confusing Phylis Diller? (l)unix needs a top to bottom overhaul and a 21st century spin on what an OS is, instead of a 1968 on.
Given that the NT kernel was built on VMS principles one could make the same case for windows. OSX is a UNIX for the user desktop, other UNIX versions (and Linux) were not deskgned for grandma, but they are coming around.
Ye are all bin playing ketchup for nearly a decade with your feared MS and by clinging to the past and living in fear, ye are only lagging further behind and isolating yourself from the people ye should be winning over is MS is the evil you claim it is.
Huh? half the technologies that get wrapped up into windows have been in the computing world for years.
MS is for people who want to get stuff done and don't want to worry about swap space.
MS is for guys who dont mind slowing their computer down with virus/spy ware scanning software, and other tools that it needs to be as safe as a *nix.
The ones buying their houses with chinese blood money??
And I disagree with IBM;s move whats does that have to do with Linux? So youre argument is constantly, well the other guy is also bad..
Then you'd better talk to Bush. He's been relaxing export restrictions, and his brother has been helping one of their semiconductor companies -- they're about to move to a .13 micron process using our technology, likely thanks to him. I'd be more worried about that than an OS a college student started about 13 years ago.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.