From: kayparker@mailite.com (Kay Parker )
Subject: [TUHS] SunOS vs Linux
Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2017 10:02:17 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1483898537.3109544.841035897.5E751FC9@webmail.messagingengine.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAE49LGk1XN-re8=r4XfiWqtjujK8n6-6POxjoH_4EUygE_e=GA@mail.gmail.com>
You remember correctly:
'If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would
probably never had happened.'
http://gondwanaland.com/meta/history/interview.html
On Sun, Jan 8, 2017, at 08:28 AM, Angus Robinson wrote:
> I think at one point Linus said that if he had known or if 386bsd was
> available he would not have started Linux
>
> (If I remember correctly)
>
> On 6 Jan 2017 05:57, "Dan Cross" <crossd at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Clem Cole <clemc at ccc.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 11:17 AM, ron minnich <rminnich at gmail.com[1]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Larry, had Sun open sourced SunOS, as you fought so hard to make
>>>> happen, Linux might not have happened as it did. SunOS was really
>>>> good. Chalk up another win for ATT!
>>>>
>>>
>>> FWIW: I disagree. For details look at my discussion of rewriting
>>> Linux in RUST[2] on quora. But a quick point is this .... Linux
>>> original took off (and was successful) not because of GPL, but in
>>> spite of it and later the GPL would help it. But it was not the GPL
>>> per say that made Linux vs BSD vs SunOS et al.
>>>
>>> What made Linux happen was the BSDi/UCB vs AT&T case. At the
>>> time, a lot of hackers (myself included) thought the case was about
>>> *copyright*. It was not, it was about *trade secret* and the ideas
>>> around UNIX. * i.e.* folks like, we "mentally contaminated" with
>>> the AT&T Intellectual Property.
>>>
>>> When the case came, folks like me that were running 386BSD which
>>> would later begat FreeBSD et al, got scared. At that time, *BSD
>>> (and SunOS) were much farther along in the development and
>>> stability. But .... may of us hought Linux would insulate us from
>>> losing UNIX on cheap HW because their was not AT&T copyrighted code
>>> in it. Sadly, the truth is that if AT&T had won the case, _*all
>>> UNIX-like systems*_ would have had to be removed from the market in
>>> the USA and EU [NATO-allies for sure].
>>>
>>> That said, the fact the *BSD and Linux were in the wild, would have
>>> made it hard to enforce and at a "Free" (as in beer) price it may
>>> have been hard to make it stick. But that it was a
>>> misunderstanding of legal thing that made Linux "valuable" to us,
>>> not the implementation.
>>>
>>> If SunOS has been available, it would not have been any different.
>>> It would have been thought of based on the AT&T IP, but trade secret
>>> and original copyright.
>>
>> Yes, it seems in retrospect that USL v BSDi basically killed Unix
>> (in the sense that Linux is not a blood-relative of Unix). I
>> remember someone quipping towards the late 90s, "the Unix wars are
>> over. Linux won."
>>
>> Perhaps an interesting area of speculation is, "what would the world
>> have looked like if USL v BSDi hadn't happened *and* SunOS was opened
>> to the world?" I think in that parallel universe, Linux wouldn't have
>> made it particularly far: absent the legal angle, what would the
>> incentive had been to work on something that was striving to
>> basically be Unix, when really good Unix was already available?
>>
>> Ah well.
>>
>> - Dan C.
>>
--
Kay Parker
kayparker at mailite.com
Links:
1. https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&fs=1&tf=1&to=rminnich at gmail.com
2. https://www.quora.com/Would-it-be-possible-advantageous-to-rewrite-the-Linux-kernel-in-Rust-when-the-language-is-stable
--
http://www.fastmail.com - IMAP accessible web-mail
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20170108/cc52a884/attachment-0001.html>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-08 18:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-04 17:08 Clem Cole
2017-01-06 2:32 ` ron minnich
2017-01-06 3:56 ` Dan Cross
2017-01-06 3:58 ` Larry McVoy
2017-01-06 14:27 ` Clem Cole
2017-01-07 2:58 ` Greg 'groggy' Lehey
2017-01-07 3:09 ` Warner Losh
2017-01-07 3:13 ` Larry McVoy
2017-01-07 3:12 ` Larry McVoy
2017-01-08 16:28 ` Angus Robinson
2017-01-08 18:02 ` Kay Parker [this message]
2017-01-08 20:51 ` Clem cole
2017-01-09 3:00 ` Greg 'groggy' Lehey
2017-01-09 6:32 ` Arno Griffioen
2017-01-09 8:27 ` Wesley Parish
2017-01-09 13:07 ` Joerg Schilling
2017-01-09 15:57 ` Clem Cole
2017-01-09 16:08 ` ron minnich
2017-01-09 17:40 ` Dan Cross
2017-01-09 17:32 ` Rico Pajarola
2017-01-10 11:02 ` Joerg Schilling
2017-01-08 22:52 ` Wesley Parish
2017-01-09 19:45 ` Jacob Goense
2017-01-08 6:10 Kirk McKusick
2017-01-08 14:52 ` Ron Natalie
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1483898537.3109544.841035897.5E751FC9@webmail.messagingengine.com \
--to=kayparker@mailite.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).