From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jun 15 2:17:33 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from tisch.mail.mindspring.net (tisch.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.157]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2A9737B401 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 02:17:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from mindspring.com (dialup-209.245.138.115.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.245.138.115]) by tisch.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id FAA12792; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 05:17:06 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3B29D2B0.7B48A2BF@mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 02:17:36 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rahul Siddharthan Cc: Matt Wilbur , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Cheezy "SysAdmin" magazine article References: <3B29C722.5979824B@mindspring.com> <20010615104753.A61673@lpt.ens.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > > Terry Lambert said on Jun 15, 2001 at 01:28:18: > > 15) Creation and deletion of large numbers of files in a > > single directory is rather meaningless; witness the > > moronic 'postmark' "benchmark", and the resulting > > discussion on several FreeBSD lists. The "benchmark" > > was clearly designed to put forth a political agenda > > (in the context of the list discussion, this agenda > > was the pro-ReiserFS position, despite Reiser's use > > of several USL/Novell patents on Delayed Ordered > > Writes, without the permission of the patent holders, > > which render a pro-ResierFS argument as meaningless > > as arguing about the number of angels which can dance > > on the head of a pin). > > There was a thread on patented algorithms in FreeBSD on -hackers > some days ago. For Jordan's opinion on that, see > > http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=346010+0+current/freebsd-hackers Jordan is wrong. AT&T/USL has been known to sue before. USL has defended these particular patents successfully twice already. The "patented algorithm" thread in FreeBSD is based on an indefensible patent: prior art dating to 1990 was demostrated, making the patent invalid, if challenged in court. Jordan is also wrong about the number of patent infringements in FreeBSD. According to a six month due-dilligence by IBM, there are no infringements in the FreeBSD kernel, and the FreeBSD user space is (relatively) clean as well. This did not include IBM patents, however, since they were unconcerned about licensing them from themselves, so there may be some lurking there. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message