|
"PATCH: ELF registry now at Caldera" in 2002 & LKP and GNU Tools |
![](http://www.groklaw.net/images/speck.gif) |
Monday, July 28 2008 @ 04:55 AM EDT
|
Well, well. What have we here? It's a June 5, 2002 message posted by Lars Brinkhoff with that very subject line: "PATCH: ELF registry now at Caldera" in the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GNU binutils project. It's in answer to a message from Hans-Peter Nilsson, saying that he couldn't figure out how to "get in touch with ELF people". Brinkhoff shares an email he received from Dave Prosser at Caldera, after he wrote to registry@caldera.com. I believe it's more evidence that when Caldera distributed binutils in OpenLinux and in other products, it was not by mistake or without knowledge of what was in there. And they knew it was and is licensed under the GPL. Note that this is after the date, 1995, that SCO claimed was significant regarding ELF. Of course, Ralf Flaxa already told the Utah court in a Declaration filed in the SCO v. IBM case that Caldera knew what it was distributing in Linux, because he worked for Caldera then and he knew:
28. I understand that SCO claims that certain materials in Linux infringe SCO's alleged intellectual property, specifically: header files required by the Open Group's Single Unix Specification (SUS), header files relating to the Streams technology, and files and specifications relating to the Executable and Linking Format (ELF).
29. While employed at Caldera, I was aware that this material was present in Linux. I know so because of my familiarity with Linux and also because Caldera incorporated it into its Linux products.
30. Caldera distributed significant parts of its Linux products under the GNU General Public License (GPL).
But it's nice to see external confirmation, so it's not a matter of dueling witnesses. And as I'll show you, there's something new, to me anyway, about the LKP, the Linux Kernel Personality. I found a Caldera/Santa Cruz 2001 press release that says GNU tools were put in LKP and that then LKP was "incorporated" into the UnixWare 7 kernel used for Open UNIX 8. I confess a new interest in LKP.
Prosser handled the patch, and I believe this is his patch from June 6, 2002, referenced in his email to Brinkhoff.
I would suggest this message on the binutils-cvs@sourceware.org list, changing the registry from Caldera back to SCO, would indicate it's not ancient history to them either. When you read the Prosser email, you'll see that he references BFD, and you may wish to take notice of this page all about BFD supporting COFF. I think at a minimum we may safely conclude that SCO/Caldera knew what it was doing. And it did distribute binutils, as you can see, with the Open Source Toolkit:
The Open Source Tool Kit, or OSTK, is an updated, supported release of some open source tools for UnixWare 7, Releases 7.1.1 and 7.1.3 and Open UNIX 8, Release 8.0.
The Open Source Tool Kit is the logical follow-on to the release of open source programs through the Skunkware media and download web site. It contains a set of released open source compilers, object file tools, libraries and other files that can be used to develop, enhance and compile programs for use on The SCO Group, Inc. SVR5 UNIX operating systems.
It also distributed binutils in Caldera OpenLinux. And then there's lxrun. That's not even a complete list. Interestingly, when Caldera and SCO in 2001 jointly announced that LKP, the Linux Kernel Personality, would be included in Open Unix 8, they mentioned it included "the same GNU tools and
libraries built into Caldera OpenLinux" in the press release:
Collaborative Product Deploys Linux(R) Applications
In Enterprise-Class Environment, Launch to Follow
Proposed Acquisition - Developers to Get Early Access
HANOVER, Germany, CeBIT, March 26 /PRNewswire/ -- Caldera Systems, Inc.
(Nasdaq: CALD) and The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. (SCO) (Nasdaq: SCOC) today
announced the forthcoming release of Open UNIX 8. By incorporating the Linux
Kernel Personality (LKP) technology into the next release of the UnixWare(R) 7
kernel, Open UNIX 8 will enable Linux applications to be deployed on top of
the powerful and highly scalable UNIX kernel. Caldera will become the owner
of the UNIX kernel when the acquisition of the SCO Server Software Division is
completed as estimated in the second calendar quarter of 2001.
Open UNIX 8 will maintain compatibility and continuity with the UnixWare 7
operating system while providing a complete Linux environment. In addition,
the product will incorporate support for the execution of unmodified Linux
Intel(R) Architecture binaries, giving users, resellers and ISVs the best of
both UNIX and Linux technologies. The result is transparent execution of Open
UNIX 8 (or UnixWare 7) applications and most Linux applications, which will
run without modification or recompilation.
"Open UNIX 8 is the first step in implementing the vision of the pending
new company," said Ransom Love, president and CEO of Caldera Systems. "It
combines the heritage of UNIX with the momentum of Linux, and will be our
premiere product for data intensive applications like database, email and
supply chain management. The incorporation of the Linux application engine
into the UnixWare kernel essentially redefines the direction of the product,
and motivates a new brand identity -- Open UNIX."
"If you need to run a Linux application in a data center environment, Open
UNIX 8 will fill the bill with the highest standard of reliability and
scalability," said Dave McCrabb, president of the SCO Server Software
Division. "We are 'unifying UNIX with Linux for Business' and this product is
a major proof point."
"One of the strengths of UNIX is its ability to provide enterprise-class,
data intensive applications," said Bill Claybrook, research director for Linux
and UNIX of Aberdeen Group. "Open UNIX 8 is positioned to play a significant
role in bridging the gap to Linux implementation in a data center
environment."
The LKP technology in Open UNIX 8 will include the same GNU tools and
libraries built into Caldera OpenLinux(TM), which were developed with close
adherence to the specifications of the proposed Linux Standards Base (LSB).
Open UNIX 8 will track this developing standard, assuring the highest degree
of application compatibility.
I didn't know GNU tools were in LKP which in turn was incorporated into the UnixWare kernel. Would that not mean, depending on what SCO means by incorporating, that LKP source and maybe the entire kernel source should be publicly available under the GPL? Of course, binutils is one of the GNU tools. I wonder if that detail has anything to do with SCO deep sixing LKP? One can't tastefully sue about ELF while distributing it oneself, although that is the smallest of the thoughts flooding my brain regarding the LKP. Here, once again, is a complete list of everything that was in OpenLinux Workstation, by the way, which was still available in October of 2006. Here's the Prosser email, within the Brinkhoff message:
***********************************
Lars Brinkhoff - PATCH: ELF registry now at Caldera
This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
PATCH: ELF registry now at Caldera
- From: Lars Brinkhoff
- To: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 05 Jun 2002 17:51:37 +0200
- Subject: PATCH: ELF registry now at Caldera
- Organization: nocrew
- References:
Lars Brinkhoff writes:
> Hans-Peter Nilsson writes:
> > On 30 May 2002, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
> > > Lars Brinkhoff writes:
> > > > I haven't found any way to get in touch with ELF people.
> > > I believe I found it now: registry@caldera.com.
> > When you're certain (as in "confirmed contact") we should change
> > all those places in the sources ;-) that mention registry@sco.com
> I can take care of updating this. I'll send a patch when I hear from
> the Caldera folks.
I believe this qualifies as confirmed contact?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 10:05:09 -0400
From: Dave Prosser
To: Lars Brinkhoff
CC: registry@caldera.com
Subject: Re: New ELF e_machine values
Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
> I would like to register two new EM_xxx values for the e_machine field
> in the ELF header. The architectures and suggested macro symbols are:
>
> DEC PDP-10 EM_PDP10
> DEC PDP-11 EM_PDP11
Wow! These take me back a few years....
Anyway, unless you say otherwise, I've allocated a pair of "reserved"
values for these two, just because...
EM_PDP10 64 (decimal) Digital Equipment Corp. PDP-10 (Lars Brinkoff, lars@nocrew.org)
EM_PDP11 65 (decimal) Digital Equipment Corp. PDP-11 (Lars Brinkoff, lars@nocrew.org)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Patch follows. This is completely untested, but I believe it's
obvious enough. I also took the opportunity to add the new EM_
numbers.
bfd/doc/ChangeLog:
2002-06-05 Lars Brinkhoff
* bfdint.texi: Change registry@sco.com to
registry@caldera.com.
include/elf/ChangeLog:
2002-06-05 Lars Brinkhoff
* common.h: Change registry@sco.com to registry@caldera.com.
* common.h (EM_PDP10, EM_PDP11): Define.
Index: bfd/doc/bfdint.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/bfd/doc/bfdint.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -u -r1.11 bfdint.texi
--- bfd/doc/bfdint.texi 30 Oct 2001 15:20:03 -0000 1.11
+++ bfd/doc/bfdint.texi 5 Jun 2002 15:42:17 -0000
@@ -1545,9 +1545,9 @@
@item
Define @samp{ELF_MACHINE_CODE} to the magic number which should appear
in the @samp{e_machine} field of the ELF header. As of this writing,
-these magic numbers are assigned by SCO; if you want to get a magic
+these magic numbers are assigned by Caldera; if you want to get a magic
number for a particular processor, try sending a note to
-@email{registry@@sco.com}. In the BFD sources, the magic numbers are
+@email{registry@@caldera.com}. In the BFD sources, the magic numbers are
found in @file{include/elf/common.h}; they have names beginning with
@samp{EM_}.
@item
Index: include/elf/common.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/include/elf/common.h,v
retrieving revision 1.44
diff -u -r1.44 common.h
--- include/elf/common.h 28 May 2002 14:08:21 -0000 1.44
+++ include/elf/common.h 5 Jun 2002 15:42:17 -0000
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@
#define ET_HIPROC 0xFFFF /* Processor-specific */
/* Values for e_machine, which identifies the architecture. These numbers
- are officially assigned by registry@sco.com. See below for a list of
+ are officially assigned by registry@caldera.com. See below for a list of
ad-hoc numbers used during initial development. */
#define EM_NONE 0 /* No machine */
@@ -145,6 +145,8 @@
#define EM_TINYJ 61 /* Advanced Logic Corp. TinyJ embedded processor */
#define EM_X86_64 62 /* Advanced Micro Devices X86-64 processor */
+#define EM_PDP10 64 /* Digital Equipment Corp. PDP-10 */
+#define EM_PDP11 65 /* Digital Equipment Corp. PDP-11 */
#define EM_FX66 66 /* Siemens FX66 microcontroller */
#define EM_ST9PLUS 67 /* STMicroelectronics ST9+ 8/16 bit microcontroller */
#define EM_ST7 68 /* STMicroelectronics ST7 8-bit microcontroller */
@@ -184,7 +186,7 @@
will have a collision. Instead, pick a random number.
Normally, each entity or maintainer responsible for a machine with an
- unofficial e_machine number should eventually ask registry@sco.com for
+ unofficial e_machine number should eventually ask registry@caldera.com for
an officially blessed number to be added to the list above. */
#define EM_PJ_OLD 99 /* picoJava */
|
|
Authored by: Erwan on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 05:11 AM EDT |
If any.
---
Erwan[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- lxrun link - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 08:55 PM EDT
- lxrun link - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 09:17 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Erwan on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 05:12 AM EDT |
Please, don't forget to quote the article's title.
---
Erwan[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- New Search Engine Cuil "analyzes the Web, not its users" - Authored by: lordshipmayhem on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 06:22 AM EDT
- New Search Engine Cuil "analyzes the Web, not its users" - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 07:14 AM EDT
- New Search Engine Cuil "analyzes the Web, not its users" - Authored by: PJ on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 07:28 AM EDT
- New Search Engine Cuil "analyzes the Web, not its users" - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 08:07 AM EDT
- Honeypot - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 08:29 AM EDT
- First it has to work reasonably well - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 10:19 AM EDT
- Cookies are not the problem - Authored by: tiger99 on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 01:58 PM EDT
- This cookie sets your display preference only. - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 02:43 PM EDT
- strange page - New Search Engine Cuil "analyzes the Web, not its users" - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 07:42 PM EDT
- ath9k - Atheros unveils free Linux driver for its 802.11n devices - Authored by: tiger99 on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 08:18 AM EDT
- Dell E and E slim revealed... - Authored by: Bernard on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 09:30 PM EDT
- MS to help test open source in Capetown ... FUD Center - Authored by: bbaston on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 10:05 AM EDT
- FUD keywords - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 01:08 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Erwan on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 05:12 AM EDT |
As usual.
---
Erwan[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Windows XP for OLPC laptop finalised - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 09:03 AM EDT
- [repost] Seems The Washington Post has another Internet crisis - Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 11:56 AM EDT
- $ for GL - a question of propriety - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 01:02 PM EDT
- SCM - Sega Can't Manage (their source code) - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 02:56 PM EDT
- The oldest site on the internet - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 04:35 PM EDT
- "Got dumb lawyers?" - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 06:15 PM EDT
- Redundant! - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 09:53 PM EDT
- Redundant! - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 01:20 AM EDT
- Redundant! - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 02:40 PM EDT
- Redundant! - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, July 30 2008 @ 11:19 AM EDT
- Tenise Barker Takes On RIAA Damages Theory - already won on 'making available' - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 06:36 PM EDT
- On the Windows 7 trick . . . - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 07:05 PM EDT
- Bruce Schneier: Software Liabilities and Free Software - Authored by: Winter on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 05:28 AM EDT
- OT: Firefox query - Authored by: Peter H. Salus on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 08:41 AM EDT
- Don't criminalize security research! Change Bill C-61 - Authored by: JamesK on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 10:41 AM EDT
- Free Software and Liability Questions - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 11:04 AM EDT
- OT, FUD Alert: 18 Features Windows Should Have (but Doesn't) - Authored by: artp on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 12:48 PM EDT
- OT, the Off topic thread - Ed Foster of Info World Gripeline has passed away. - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 01:32 PM EDT
- OT, the Off topic thread - Authored by: red floyd on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 03:00 PM EDT
- Stolen UK passports worth £2.5m - Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 03:04 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 06:44 AM EDT |
Why are the dates even relevant?
It's an ABI, the only rights that could be asserted are (IMHO badly issued)
patents. Copyrights would only be relevant if there were infringing copies of
the specification or a specific implementation.
An ABI specification can be copyrighted.
Code implementing an ABI can be copyrighted.
Anyone can implement an ABI without infringing on either of these copyrights.
An ABI is just a file format, just like a document format - as we know, the main
legal concern is patents, and the main practical concern in the case of
Microsoft's document formats has traditionally been lack of consistency and
proper documentation.
Or did I miss SCO claiming that some part of Linux's implementation of the ELF
ABI includes their copyrighted code? My impression was that they simply don't
understand what an ABI is and were just claiming that since Linux uses the same
ABI, it must be infringing somehow.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 07:28 AM EDT |
You mean that it was released under the GPL before Caldera started to distribute
it in OpenLinux?
Keep up the good work, PJ. The Mofos love you. Trust me.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Am I being thick? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 11:22 AM EDT
- Am I being thick? 2. - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 11:27 AM EDT
- Am I being thick? 2. - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 01:22 PM EDT
- I wish... - Authored by: scav on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 08:23 AM EDT
- I wish... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 01:39 PM EDT
|
Authored by: sk43 on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 07:38 AM EDT |
You mean it still DOES distribute binutils:
ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/unixware7/713/OSTools-2.0.3.ds
ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/unixware7/714/OSTools-2.0.4.ds
ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/openserver5/opensrc/source/gnutools-5.0.7Kj-SRC.tar.bz2
ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/openserver5/opensrc/gnutools-5.0.7Kj
The innards of OSTools is described here:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080301131930129#c678734
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: tiger99 on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 08:07 AM EDT |
Nor did I. I can't immediately see why any tools were in LKP. As far as I can
see, LKP is only a kernel module to provide a Linux-type ABI, in the same way
that Linux has modules to provide BSD, Solaris, SCO, Xenix (ugh!) and various
other ABIs. (Some of these may not be in the latest kernels, as no-one wants
them.) Tools could reasonably be expected to live in userland, not in the
kernel, and as such would, as far as licensing issues are concerned, be
standalone programs. The Wikipedia article only lists
userland programs, however they do need to have knowledge of the kernel
ABI. When I get home tonight I will try to find my Open Unix 8 disks, and have
another look to see what is actually there. But for now, I am sure that the GNU
binutils are not in any SCO or other Unix or Unixware kernel, nor in any
Linux kernel. Sorry PJ, on this one point I think you are slightly confused.
Not that it should matter anyway, as SCO are just plain wrong on so many things,
and we know that ABIs are not copyrightable anyway. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 09:50 AM EDT |
Dilbert for
7/28/08
-Wang-Lo.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 09:52 AM EDT |
Hah!
If there's ONE LINE from the GPL in SCO's offering, then it is all GPL.
Hey, it works for UnixWare![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 10:38 AM EDT |
I have a mint copy of Caldera Linux (not sure exactly what version) but it dates
from the early 21st Century (e.g. 2000-2002 time frame).
Does anyone at Groklaw want me to send it to you (free... it would be nice if
someone would pick up the postage however). Might help iron out some of these
"what did the software have in it" questions.
If Pamela Jones wants to reply to this thread and say "yes" then I can
arrange to have it sent to somewhere that she / he wants to pick it up. I'd
suggest that this be done through a third party so that we don't risk Pamela's
anonymity.
Regards
A Canadian Telco Security Dweeb[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: groklaw_fan on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 10:51 AM EDT |
SCO has been saying and is still saying that they are waiting for their day in
court in front of a jury. I suppose they feel that their lawyers can spellbind
the jurors with tales of a big bad company (IBM) picking on a poor innocent
little company (SCO).
However, I think that they should be careful what they wish for. SCO is not
acknowledging the importance of articles like this one, that show that SCO has
known all along that they have no basis to sue. They also fail to recognise the
importance of all of the back room correspondence between SCO and Novell, which
shows that SCO knew that it did not even own the copyrights that they were suing
over.
With facts like these available, I think that the jurors, rather than being
spellbound by SCO's lawyers, will be overcome by the noxious fumes of bad faith
coming from the SCO side of the court.
Any PIPE fairy that wants to step into this mess at this point better think long
and hard about that. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Henning Makholm on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 10:51 AM EDT |
What is the legal standard for a corporation to "know" something? Is
it enough that at least one employee, in the course of his duties, were aware of
the fact in question?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 03:22 PM EDT |
Prosser said 'LKP included "same GNU tools and libraries built into Caldera
OpenLinux".' While true (they did ship compilers, binutils, other tools,
and libraries so that people could rebuild their Linux binaries to run on the
hardware), the real issue might be "how did they learn enough to build LKP
in the first place?" This is not a trivial piece of work or a trivial
package - LKP required real work and knowledge. The key take-away is: SCOG
cannot claim technical ignorance. Substantial technical personnel would be
needed to understand or steal ideas (or more) from code the size of Linux.
Management can't claim ignorance either: products were released for sale and use
which requires a management sign-off process. The development AND release were
not done by a bunch of renegades (and even if it had been, they were SCOG
renegades, so SCOG should sue them not the world).
Review the quote again, especially: "LKP included "same GNU tools and
libraries built into Caldera OpenLinux"
Then, remember that they distributed that (COL) code. Under the GPL. Another
and perhaps much bigger quote is:
"released open source compilers, object file tools, libraries and other
files that can be used to develop, enhance and compile programs for use on The
SCO Group, Inc. *** SVR5 *** UNIX operating systems"
Come again? They admit they "released" the "SVR5"-related
info? You can't compile without headers (such as errno.h) libraries (for
statically-built code), and they certainly relied (heavily) on open source tools
like gcc.
What else is needed to "develop, enhance, *and compile*? API details,
methods and concepts, documentation. So they sued IBM? DOH! What a bunch of
idiots! Wait, you say they're not idiots? Then they must be crooks because there
is no way the release, spanning many years, thousands of accesses, thousands of
tools and files, thousands to hundreds of thousands of emails, phone calls,
multiple books and magazine articles, statements by management, sales people,
etc. was "accidental".
Don't forget - they knew it BEFORE they filed suit too, because they had an
expert review and analyze the code, and the conclusion was there were no
significant issues with Linux. (And no proof of ownership or code provenance
even if there had been issues).
This more than smacks of outright and gross incompetence, thievery, and blatant,
malicious prosecution.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 28 2008 @ 05:19 PM EDT |
"Caldera International Inc. (Nasdaq: CALD), the global leader 'Unifying
UNIX with Linux for Business™,' Tuesday announced the launch of its new server
products, Caldera OpenLinux Server and Caldera Open UNIX 8, which enable the
deployment of Linux applications on both the Linux and UNIX platforms.
"Using the Linux application environment as a common interface, Caldera's
new server products provide dependable platforms for business needs ranging from
the low-end server to the high-end data center.
"Open UNIX 8 is a significant milestone for Caldera to deliver on the
commitment to unify UNIX with Linux for business. Open UNIX 8 incorporates the
Linux Kernel Personality (LKP) technology, which enables customers to run Linux
applications and UNIX applications simultaneously."
http://ir.sco.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=45275[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Nonad on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 12:19 AM EDT |
Lxrun poster... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: bb5ch39t on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 11:14 AM EDT |
I don't know if anybody here has been following the story of Terry Childs. He
designed, implemented, and administered the City of San Francisco's FiberLAN. He
is now in jail (5 million dollar bond) for holding the userids and
passwords to sensitive servers secret. Well, they are secret no more. Mr.
Childs gave them to the mayor. The D.A. then put them in a
UNSEALED court document which was filed. No wonder Terry was
paranoid about security!
One
Article
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 03:54 PM EDT |
I have Caldera Linux from 1997. The "elf.h" header is distributed in the default
(full) install. You don't have to install the source separately. Here are some
screen shots.
Caldera splash
screen.
Listing of source
directory.
Sample of elf
header.
Sample of elf
header. Note the comment about waiting for the committee to come up with an
official value.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: davidf on Tuesday, July 29 2008 @ 06:35 PM EDT |
Hasn't FreeBSD used a sort of Linux compatibility layer for at least a decade
now? I know there is a whole Linux subsystem that can be installed which makes
all Linux appliecations instantly available to FreeBSD users. How does this
relate to ELF and what SCO/Caldera did? Is it the same thing?
Cheers,
Davidf[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|