From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270009AbTHGRvD (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Aug 2003 13:51:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270040AbTHGRvD (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Aug 2003 13:51:03 -0400 Received: from [64.246.24.15] ([64.246.24.15]:17318 "EHLO twu.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270009AbTHGRvB (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Aug 2003 13:51:01 -0400 Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 11:49:41 -0600 (MDT) From: JLB To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org cc: rms@gnu.org, torvalds@transmeta.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Subject: A quick and (relatively) easy response to this SCO BS Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org O great ones: Some clever soul on Kuro5hin has posted information on how to obtain a recent 2.4 kernel from SCO legally. I strongly recommend that the kernel maintainers create a new "SCOlegal" branch of the kernel, based on this source code. New drivers can simply be backported back in, and voila, there's not a thing SCO can do about it. If this is a waste of everyone's time, I beg your pardon. But given the current bizarre state of affairs in US law, there is always a chance that the SCO loonies might win. We need to be prepared. There is a chance, however slight, that the entire GNU/Linux community could crumble irrevocably as a direct result of this fiasco. --Jessica