×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Proof that UNIX code was copied into Linux

walterbyrd (182728) writes | more than 3 years ago

Caldera 6

walterbyrd (182728) writes "SCO's ex-CEO's brother, a lawyer named Kevin McBride, has finally revealed the UNIX code that was copied into Linux. Scroll down to the part that reads: "SCO submitted a very material amount of literal copying from UNIX to Linux in the SCO v. IBM case. For example, see the following excerpts from SCO’s evidence submission in Dec. 2005 in the SCO v. IBM case:" There are several links to PDF files that reveal the UNIX code that was copied into Linux."

6 comments

oh please (1)

twitter (104583) | more than 3 years ago | (#32867506)

We are supposed to believe this now, and so what? SCO had every opportunity to publish this years ago but made people sign NDAs to look at their supposed proof. The only people who bothered with the NDAs were Microsoft friendly press people like MoG who made sure everyone believed there was a REAL CASE. Of course there was not, it was all FUD and nonsense. Had there ever been any code in Linux that could not be distributed under the GPL it would have been rewritten. SCO lost this trial three times, please let it die.

Nothing to see here. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#32869726)

Also no one gives a shit.

WTF? (1)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 3 years ago | (#32870338)

If there is any truth to this at all, it would be one of the most significant stories every posted on slashdot.

Well (1)

sea4ever (1628181) | more than 3 years ago | (#32870460)

I've looked at the code in the article. (You call it TFA, right? just clarifying)

While there are similarities they could just be that they used very similar implementation. There are only a certain number of ways to solve a problem after all.
A lot of the variables have slightly different names though, and the functions include some extra checking in the linux versions.
If the code was written based on some common documentation then this could result. However, this tab [mcbride-law.com] is particularly spooky; the functions are in the same order and have the same names, the comments are identical and in the same places(slight change in comment style though, extra asterisk) and the structs are also almost identical.
If I had to make a guess, I'd say that that file there was most definitely copied over and 'touched up' on, the rest maybe not.
What does it matter if it was copied though? This is ages ago..the linux source code is everywhere now!

Can slashdotters prove Kevin McBride wrong? (1)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 3 years ago | (#32870534)

Actually, I think Kevin is full of crap. I was hoping some slashdotters could prove as much.

If Linux is actually full of UNIX code, as Kevin claims, then Linux really might be illegal, just as Microsoft has claimed all along.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...