[lkml]   [2003]   [Jun]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectUnix code in Linux

    Slashdotter lspd pointed this out in a recent thread, thereby
    demonstrating that slashdot isn't completely useless.

    /usr/src/linux/arch/ia64/sn/io/ate_utils.c in Linux
    unix/malloc.c in UNIX 6th Edition (page 25 of the Lions code,
    lines 2522--2589)

    atefree() is very obviously based on Unix's mfree(), and atealloc() on
    malloc(). atefree()/mfree() even have the *same leading comment*. Of
    course, there are some changes, but the overall structure and many of
    the details remain.

    The copyright notice on ate_utils.c says:

    * This file is subject to the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public
    * License. See the file "COPYING" in the main directory of this archive
    * for more details.
    * Copyright (C) 1992 - 1997, 2000-2002 Silicon Graphics, Inc. All rights reserved.

    This code is obviously not a trade secret, since it has been published
    in the 1996 version of the Lions book. However, it is copyrighted,
    and the book's (C) notice says:
    . . . SCO [i.e. the Santa Cruz Operation, not The SCO Group] has
    granted a license to publish solely for the purpose of creating an
    educational work. SCO grants no license for any other use of this
    material . . . .

    What kind of license did SGI have to the Unix code ca. 2000--2002?
    Did the original malloc()/mfree() appear in BSD Lite (and thus lost to
    USL/Novell in the settlement)? Is there any reason to replace this
    code? Is there any reason not to replace this code?

    Neil Moore:,
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:0.029 / U:69.828 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site