A Canadian Response to SCO

[Rick Tomaschuk]

The response I received at the briefing to that question was that only
kernels 2.4-2.6 were affected. Prior versions were not under dispute.
RickT

On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 07:52:19 -0400 (EDT), Max Blanco
<blanco-S8qYAnHmZTt34ZA5RureAJ4VBq8PJc8F at public.gmane.org> wrote :

> On 22 Aug 2003, Matthew Rice wrote:
> 
> > Hi everyone,
> > 
> > This has been forwarded from the NewTLUG mailing list.  Bill
Traynor [the
> > original poster] hasn't been able to send this to TLUG.  Well, at
least he
> > and I haven't seen it show up on the list.
> > 
> > So I'm trying.
> > 
> 
> Can I read somewhere about how this issue affects the little guy?
> I have a 1995 distro of redhat.  Does this affect me?
> What about if I have a 2.2 kernel built in 2000?
> 
> CLIC has been up in arms over the courtroom theatrics, but how about 
> the substance?  It hasn't been clear to me why I should care.
> (Sorry if that's a little blunt.)
> 
> If I read this right, as long as you stick to 2.4 kernel code, who
cares?
> 
> Can you delete the offending 27 lines of code from the kernel and still 
> make it crash proof and kickass...?
> 
> 
> --
> The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
> TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
> How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml
> 
> 
> 
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml