Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 23:14:13 -0500 From: "Nikolas Britton" <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> To: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog@freebsd.org> Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>, Allen <slackwarewolf@comcast.net>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The Real UNIX? (was: The Unix Haters Handbook) Message-ID: <ef10de9a0606042114r2e0dec0ch8afe9dc5134927cf@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20060605033821.GH50579@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <447E9540.2020003@io.dk> <200606011357.11990.aren.tyr@gawab.com> <447F0062.8060302@daleco.biz> <20060601144317.47402556@hydrocodone.org> <867j3z3om6.fsf@xps.des.no> <20060603093810.601366af@hydrocodone.org> <86odx9pe3w.fsf@dwp.des.no> <20060605033821.GH50579@wantadilla.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 6/4/06, Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Sunday, 4 June 2006 at 9:35:47 +0200, Dag-Erling Smrgrav wrote: > > Allen <slackwarewolf@comcast.net> writes: > >> Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav <des@des.no> writes: > >>> Allen <slackwarewolf@comcast.net> writes: > >>>> Technically FreeBSD has more right than SCO UNIX to be called UNIX > >>> No. Unlike FreeBSD, SCO UnixWare is a direct descendent of the > >>> original AT&T Unix. > >> > >> So is / was Free BSD. That's why AT&T sued. > > > > It's not quite that simple. Even at the time of the lawsuit, BSD had > > very little AT&T code in it, and the lawsuit was sparked primarily by > > BSDI's unauthorized use of the Unix trademark. Read this: > > > > http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/kirkmck.html > > There's a difference between technical and commercial rights. Allen > was referring to the technical issues. > > How much code is in the source base is one issue, but I don't know if > I'd call it technical. During the attack on IBM, SCO accidentally > revealed that the base System V malloc is still the same as the > Seventh Edition malloc (something so horrible that BSD rewrote it > decades ago, and Linux people threw it out for ugliness without > knowing the origin). > > But is that the technical aspect we mean? Throughout the 1980s System > V borrowed heavily from 4.[23]BSD. The Eighth Edition of Research > UNIX was derived from 4.1cBSD. From that perspective, I'd really be > inclined to think that BSD has more claim to be the real UNIX than > Missed'em V has. > How much would it take to get The Open Group to re-certify FreeBSD as UNIX and what would it take for FreeBSD to meet the requirements for UNIX certification, and would it be beneficial to FreeBSD if this happened? --=20 BSD Podcasts @: http://bsdtalk.blogspot.com/ http://freebsdforall.blogspot.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ef10de9a0606042114r2e0dec0ch8afe9dc5134927cf>