Subject: Re: BSD Unix aka Freedom is a myth.... From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 04:52:00 GMT
In article <1992Jul22.215906.10708@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> lfoard@Turing.ORG (Lawrence C. Foard) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21.112705.6276@cs.cornell.edu> murthy@cs.cornell.edu (Chet Murthy) writes:
>>Y'know, Doug Comer's XINU, Linus Torvalds' Linux, Tanenbaum's Minix,
>>and I'm sure there are others, all stand as good arguments that the technology
>>if UNIX isn't just an AT&T invention anymore - the V sytem, Mach,
>>ad a zillin other ways of implementing the core of UNIX exist.
>>
>>I think that even if BSDI fails, even if 386BSD fails, and even
>>if the entire Berkeley net2 distrib gets nuked,
>>free unix is perhaps 2 years away - in 2 years, linux will be stable.
>>In two years, the GNU Hurd will be stable. And AT&T can
>>do almost nothing abot that, eh?
>
>I'm somewhat concerned about the possibility that some Linux developers
>might be familiar with AT&T code. For legal reasons it might be best
>to make sure that all Linux kernel code is developed by people with
>no prior experience with AT&T code.
>
>>But you're right - I'm pissed, too. From what I heard of the history,
>>BSD started with V6 unix, a developed a _whole_ _lot_
>>of what currently constitutes UNIX. To claim that AT&T did ti all is
>>goinga bit far.
>
>The unfortunite thing is that money makes right in court. Atleast Linux
>is an international effort and may be harder for AT&T to stop.
And when you consider how Linus has been tainted by the MINIX sources, then
consider that AST might be out hiring lawyers. :-) :-) :-)
Of course, Linus could then turn around and sue AST for attempted brain
damage. :-) :-) :-)
--Rick Kelly rmk@rmkhome.UUCP unixland!rmkhome!rmk rmk@frog.UUCP