Re: [OT] SCO is going all out now
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 11:37:10PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-07-21 at 23:32, Brian McGroarty wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 06:25:18PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 07:03:55PM +0200, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> [snip]
> > SCO has made no claims against the 2.2 kernels.
> >
> > If worst comes to worst and SCO finally show some incriminating code
> > in 2.4, stepping back to 2.2 until the relevant bits are purged from
> > 2.4 is all anyone should need to do to cover their assets in countries
> > where this becomes an issue.
> >
> > AC maintains functional backports of all the important bits, so few PC
> > Linux users should be significantly affected by an (IMHO) unlikely
> > judgement in SCO's favor. If you maintain a large number of systems
> > professionally with 2.4, an advance test of 2.2 might be prudent.
>
> How does the lack of modern features (USB2.0, ieee1394, DVD, etc)
> in 2.2 stack up against FreeBSD-current?
2.2 can support ieee1394 and DVD playback (with patches in common use
if they're not yet mainstream) -- I don't know the status of DVD
filesystems or USB2.0.
FreeBSD supports all of the above.
Do you suspect there could be a long enough delay between releasing
the alleged infractions and producing a clean kernel that fully
changing OSes could make sense, however?
Reply to: