The Unix Heritage Society mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
@ 2012-08-13  2:59 Norman Wilson
  2012-08-13  4:02 ` Larry McVoy
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Norman Wilson @ 2012-08-13  2:59 UTC (permalink / raw)


Werner Losh:

  However, the complicating factor here is, I think, that SYS V uses a
  lot of code from the later editions of Unix, so relicensing the newer
  research versions might cut into the license streams from them in
  some way.  At least that was reported at the time of the only through
  7th edition licensing.

=======

I'm not sure who would have reported that `System V uses a lot of
code from [post-7th] editions of UNIX.'  I may be misled by having
had my hands and eyes mainly on the kernel and the most-basic commands
like the shell, but offhand I can't think of any System V code at all
that was adopted directly from the Research systems in the 8th, 9th,
or 10th Edition eras.

There were certainly ideas that were picked up, mulled over, and
re-implemented in changed form by the System V people, sometimes
better and sometimes worse than the original; but not straight
code transplants.  The systems had diverged far too much for that
to be easy.

If anything, the licensing problem runs the other way: System V
code taken in by the Research system.  For example, the C compiler
we used most was based on pcc2, developed on the System V side of
the company after Steve Johnson moved there.  I think our version
of make may have been based on a System V version as well.  I'm
sure there are other (mainly smaller) examples, though since we
used no source-code control mechanism, tracing the details is
non-trivial.

None of which invalidates the basic point: there's certainly
plenty of entanglement, whether because 10/e includes ideas that
were used commercially in System V and whose mutant descendants
are still present in Solaris, or because 10/e includes some
source code directly descended from System V.

It's a shame we didn't get the several companies whose lawyers
might care to agree that there's nothing of commercial value in
the latter-day Research systems back when it was simpler to figure
out who those companies were.  As I've reported here before, there
was actually some thought by certain persons here (and one who is,
alas, no longer able to be here) of doing that, some years back,
but a certain irksome legal circus about UNIX IP got going too
quickly for that to happen, and left us with the confused situation
we have today.

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
  2012-08-13  2:59 [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question Norman Wilson
@ 2012-08-13  4:02 ` Larry McVoy
  2012-08-13  8:28   ` arnold
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Larry McVoy @ 2012-08-13  4:02 UTC (permalink / raw)


> I think our version
> of make may have been based on a System V version as well.  

I have much fondness for some early version of make, perhaps that one.
I carried the source around for 15ish years and spanked people who 
wrote makefiles that didn't work with that make.

Sadly, my team has moved on to GNU make.  

> I'm
> sure there are other (mainly smaller) examples, though since we
> used no source-code control mechanism, tracing the details is
> non-trivial.

No SCCS?  When did Rochkind do SCCS?  Wasn't it early 70's?  I gotta believe
there is SCCS history out there.  And for the record, BitKeeper can read it.
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
  2012-08-13  4:02 ` Larry McVoy
@ 2012-08-13  8:28   ` arnold
  2012-08-13 11:52     ` Brantley Coile
                       ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: arnold @ 2012-08-13  8:28 UTC (permalink / raw)


Larry McVoy <lm at bitmover.com> wrote:

> > I'm
> > sure there are other (mainly smaller) examples, though since we
> > used no source-code control mechanism, tracing the details is
> > non-trivial.
>
> No SCCS?  When did Rochkind do SCCS?  Wasn't it early 70's?  I gotta believe
> there is SCCS history out there.  And for the record, BitKeeper can read it.

I think Norman's point was that the Research guys didn't use a source
code control system.  SCCS was around and documented in System III in 1980,
so it was probably done before then, but not in the research group.

Arnold



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
  2012-08-13  8:28   ` arnold
@ 2012-08-13 11:52     ` Brantley Coile
  2012-08-13 13:05     ` Ronald Natalie
  2012-08-13 14:24     ` Warner Losh
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Brantley Coile @ 2012-08-13 11:52 UTC (permalink / raw)


maybe Norman could speak to the attitudes about source code control and the perceived need for it.

sent from my ipad

On Aug 13, 2012, at 2:32 AM, "arnold at skeeve.com" <arnold at skeeve.com> wrote:

> Larry McVoy <lm at bitmover.com> wrote:
> 
>>> I'm
>>> sure there are other (mainly smaller) examples, though since we
>>> used no source-code control mechanism, tracing the details is
>>> non-trivial.
>> 
>> No SCCS?  When did Rochkind do SCCS?  Wasn't it early 70's?  I gotta believe
>> there is SCCS history out there.  And for the record, BitKeeper can read it.
> 
> I think Norman's point was that the Research guys didn't use a source
> code control system.  SCCS was around and documented in System III in 1980,
> so it was probably done before then, but not in the research group.
> 
> Arnold
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
  2012-08-13  8:28   ` arnold
  2012-08-13 11:52     ` Brantley Coile
@ 2012-08-13 13:05     ` Ronald Natalie
  2012-08-13 14:24     ` Warner Losh
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ronald Natalie @ 2012-08-13 13:05 UTC (permalink / raw)


SCCS was developed in the Programmers Workbench (PWB) version of UNIX which came along in the late seventies (between V6 and V7).
My first job after graduating JHU in 1981 was to set up source code for the QA department as we were cross-building for RSX-11M.




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
  2012-08-13  8:28   ` arnold
  2012-08-13 11:52     ` Brantley Coile
  2012-08-13 13:05     ` Ronald Natalie
@ 2012-08-13 14:24     ` Warner Losh
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Warner Losh @ 2012-08-13 14:24 UTC (permalink / raw)



On Aug 13, 2012, at 2:28 AM, arnold at skeeve.com wrote:

> Larry McVoy <lm at bitmover.com> wrote:
> 
>>> I'm
>>> sure there are other (mainly smaller) examples, though since we
>>> used no source-code control mechanism, tracing the details is
>>> non-trivial.
>> 
>> No SCCS?  When did Rochkind do SCCS?  Wasn't it early 70's?  I gotta believe
>> there is SCCS history out there.  And for the record, BitKeeper can read it.
> 
> I think Norman's point was that the Research guys didn't use a source
> code control system.  SCCS was around and documented in System III in 1980,
> so it was probably done before then, but not in the research group.

And even with a source code control system, it can be hard to know if there's an IP issue from commit logs, since they often are of the form "more" or "better" or "latest version" when there's isn't a culture of good commit messages.  And even when there is, if there isn't a good culture of documenting upstream sources, it can be hard.  And until at least a decade into the open source revolution there wasn't a general practice in the open source community about documenting upstream sources.

I defy you, for example, to identify with enough certainty to convince a corporate lawyer who actually wrote any of the code in Linux that's still around from the 0.9x or 1.0 time frame...  You can find all the tar.gz files from the time frame, and use tools to track which lines are still around, but knowing who actually wrote it can be tricky unless the patches hit a mailing list or had some other paper trail...  And the Linux development community was a lot more open and public than developments that happened 25 years ago to some IP that's changed hands a bunch of times...

Warner




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
  2012-08-11 19:08         ` Warner Losh
@ 2012-08-11 23:04           ` A. P. Garcia
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: A. P. Garcia @ 2012-08-11 23:04 UTC (permalink / raw)


I don't think Novell exists any more than Control Data. Attachmate owns
Unix now, no?
On Aug 11, 2012 2:10 PM, "Warner Losh" <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2012, at 12:33 PM, Tim Newsham wrote:
>
> > does novell own all the rights to late edition research unix?
>
> Yes.
>
> However, the complicating factor here is, I think, that SYS V uses a lot
of code from the later editions of Unix, so relicensing the newer research
versions might cut into the license streams from them in some way.  At
least that was reported at the time of the only through 7th edition
licensing.
>
> Warner
>
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20120811/abca7fbd/attachment.html>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
  2012-08-11 18:33       ` Tim Newsham
@ 2012-08-11 19:08         ` Warner Losh
  2012-08-11 23:04           ` A. P. Garcia
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Warner Losh @ 2012-08-11 19:08 UTC (permalink / raw)



On Aug 11, 2012, at 12:33 PM, Tim Newsham wrote:

> does novell own all the rights to late edition research unix?

Yes.

However, the complicating factor here is, I think, that SYS V uses a lot of code from the later editions of Unix, so relicensing the newer research versions might cut into the license streams from them in some way.  At least that was reported at the time of the only through 7th edition licensing.

Warner




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
  2012-08-11  7:51     ` Wesley Parish
@ 2012-08-11 18:33       ` Tim Newsham
  2012-08-11 19:08         ` Warner Losh
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Tim Newsham @ 2012-08-11 18:33 UTC (permalink / raw)


does novell own all the rights to late edition research unix?

On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Wesley Parish
<wes.parish at paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> Perhaps they'd listen to a petition? It worked before.
>
>
> On 11/08/2012, at 9:42 AM, Benjamin Huntsman wrote:
>
>> Now if we could just get Novell to extend the license to cover the rest of
>> the Research UNIXes, like 8th, 9th, and 10th Editions, before the bits rot
>> out of existence...
>> I made some inquiries a while back, and basically got the impression that
>> they didn't care, and hence didn't care enough to expend legal effort to
>> extend the license.
>>
>> Might still worth be asking around about though...
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org [tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] on
>> behalf of ron at ronnatalie.com [ron at ronnatalie.com]
>> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 1:47 PM
>> To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
>> Subject: Re: [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
>>
>> I can't tell you the status of the agreements, but Novell has pretty much
>> stated after they are NOT interested in suing anybody about Linux and that
>> there is "no UNIX in Linux."
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TUHS mailing list
>> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs



-- 
Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | thenewsh.blogspot.com



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
  2012-08-10 21:42   ` Benjamin Huntsman
@ 2012-08-11  7:51     ` Wesley Parish
  2012-08-11 18:33       ` Tim Newsham
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Wesley Parish @ 2012-08-11  7:51 UTC (permalink / raw)


Perhaps they'd listen to a petition? It worked before.

On 11/08/2012, at 9:42 AM, Benjamin Huntsman wrote:

> Now if we could just get Novell to extend the license to cover the  
> rest of the Research UNIXes, like 8th, 9th, and 10th Editions,  
> before the bits rot out of existence...
> I made some inquiries a while back, and basically got the  
> impression that they didn't care, and hence didn't care enough to  
> expend legal effort to extend the license.
>
> Might still worth be asking around about though...
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org [tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org]  
> on behalf of ron at ronnatalie.com [ron at ronnatalie.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 1:47 PM
> To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
>
> I can't tell you the status of the agreements, but Novell has  
> pretty much stated after they are NOT interested in suing anybody  
> about Linux and that there is "no UNIX in Linux."
>
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
  2012-08-10 20:47 ` ron
@ 2012-08-10 21:42   ` Benjamin Huntsman
  2012-08-11  7:51     ` Wesley Parish
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Benjamin Huntsman @ 2012-08-10 21:42 UTC (permalink / raw)


Now if we could just get Novell to extend the license to cover the rest of the Research UNIXes, like 8th, 9th, and 10th Editions, before the bits rot out of existence...
I made some inquiries a while back, and basically got the impression that they didn't care, and hence didn't care enough to expend legal effort to extend the license.

Might still worth be asking around about though...


________________________________________
From: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org [tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org] on behalf of ron@ronnatalie.com [ron@ronnatalie.com]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 1:47 PM
To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
Subject: Re: [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question

I can't tell you the status of the agreements, but Novell has pretty much stated after they are NOT interested in suing anybody about Linux and that there is "no UNIX in Linux."




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
  2012-08-10 19:30 סטֵפָן פָּבִיקֵבִיק
@ 2012-08-10 20:47 ` ron
  2012-08-10 21:42   ` Benjamin Huntsman
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: ron @ 2012-08-10 20:47 UTC (permalink / raw)


An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20120810/6f545bb3/attachment.html>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question
@ 2012-08-10 19:30 סטֵפָן פָּבִיקֵבִיק
  2012-08-10 20:47 ` ron
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: סטֵפָן פָּבִיקֵבִיק @ 2012-08-10 19:30 UTC (permalink / raw)


Hello all!

Since by the jury of 2010 we now know that Novell, not SCO, owns the UNIX
copyright, is the Caldera ancient UNIX 4-clause BSD-license still valid?

Thanks in advance, God bless!

- Stefan.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20120810/80df5ae7/attachment.html>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2012-08-13 14:24 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-08-13  2:59 [TUHS] Caldera ancient UNIX license question Norman Wilson
2012-08-13  4:02 ` Larry McVoy
2012-08-13  8:28   ` arnold
2012-08-13 11:52     ` Brantley Coile
2012-08-13 13:05     ` Ronald Natalie
2012-08-13 14:24     ` Warner Losh
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-08-10 19:30 סטֵפָן פָּבִיקֵבִיק
2012-08-10 20:47 ` ron
2012-08-10 21:42   ` Benjamin Huntsman
2012-08-11  7:51     ` Wesley Parish
2012-08-11 18:33       ` Tim Newsham
2012-08-11 19:08         ` Warner Losh
2012-08-11 23:04           ` A. P. Garcia

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).