All, I've just run across this link describing one "blogger's" account of tracking down SUSE code in SCO's Unixware product. The full description of the account is under the subsection, "Is There Linux Code in SCO's UnixWare" here:
http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/2003/08/14.html The thrust of the article relates to one developer's comparison between SCO's UnixWare and SuSE's Linux Enterprise Server 8 and found the two strikingly similar. Mr. Dohnert remarks: "I found that several open source packages that are on UnixWare are also on SLES 8. The inclusion of such packages may seem commonplace to some but to me it struck me as odd in regards to the version numbers. The version numbers of all the packages are exactly the same." Mr. Dohnert went on to conclude: "It is my belief and opinion that SCO has indeed borrowed engineering concepts and methods from their association with UnitedLinux. Many of these new features and the remarkable similarity with SLES 8 did not occur until after they started to participate in UnitedLinux and since these features were available to SuSE customers before SCO's involvement I am inclined to believe that SCO's engineering team has been influenced or tainted by the Linux development process. I cannot say if UnixWare 7.1.3 or SLES 8 share common code; as I said I am not a source licensee. I feel these issues need to be investigated further." This is where things start to get interesting. You see, according to a July 11th 2003 ComputerWorld article, Sun and Microsoft have both signed up for SCO's Unixware license, full details here: http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/unix/story/0,10801,82967,00.html For Sun's part, John Loiacono, VP of Sun's Operating Platform Group said of the purchase, "The most recent license, signed in February, "licensed several hundred drivers to connect, essentially, peripheral devices to the operating system," he said." If one of those "drivers" turns out to be USB et al on their low-end Intel line, Sun's "got problems." The article states that the Microsoft license from SCO is similiar. Here's the rub: if Sun or Microsoft is using any Unixware code in their product, such as USB support, Xeon support, etc. and if a turns out that a source audit of SCO's Unixware turns up GPL'd code (as it likely would), then that means that SCO is licensing a product they do not wholly own. Further, the fact that the code may very well now be found in the Sun and Microsoft products as licensed from UnixWare means that there is now at it's core GPL'd code in both SUN and Microsoft products. This would explain why SCO is so eager to challenge the GPL (it doesn't want to have to release the source code for Unixware) and it also offers at least a plausible explanation why both Sun and Microsoft purchased Unixware licenses for millions. To the greatest logical extent this means that all three product lines' source code would have to be released because all three rely on GPL'd code to function. The short rundown is this: 1) SCO Joins UnitedLinux 2) SCO's Unixware is influenced by UnitedLinux and GPL'd code put in Unixware 3) SCO licenses Unixware to Sun, Microsoft 4) Sun, Microsft integrate Unixware code in their products 5) Uh, oh! Core code turns out to be GPL'd!! 6) SCO Group lunches what boils down to be an anti-GPL suit while Sun, Microsoft updates Unixware license for millions Would someone run a binary comparison or "strings" command against the specific drivers outlined in the first article link above? Best, -- -------------------------------------------------------------- | Cooper Stevenson | Em: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Open Source Consultant | Ph: 541.924.9434 | -------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
