OT: Unix or UNIX or unix

Robert Swanson mapa-kettle at shaw.ca
Thu Jun 11 23:17:47 UTC 2009

> > Well, no.  There's a completely different attitude to kernel design.
> > Linux came from Minix, not Unix.
> Well, no.
> Linux was created because the author of Minix (professor Andrew S.
> Tanenbaum) intentionally didn't want to add requested features. Linux was
> created from scratch, although Minix was used as staging platform: to
> compile Linux, until it reached version 0.01 and Linux was able to
> recompile itself.
> Minix uses a microkernel; Linux uses a monolithical kernel.
> If Linus Torvalds would have been one of Andy Tanenbaum's students,
> Tanenbaum wouldn't have given him good grades.
> See also the (in)famous Linus-Tanenbaum discussion, it's easy to find.
> The rest is history... ;-)

	Here is the outline of complete story from the SCO vs Novell, and SCO vs IBM 
court case, compiled as a result of the SCO's intention to require licensing 
fees for everyone using Linux. 
	Novell purchased Unix from USL labs ( ATT the original developer of Unix).  
SCO wanted to purchase all of Unux from Novell, but they didn't have near 
enough money.  Novell sold them Unix, without the copyrights  for 50 million 
in SCO stock.  SCO claimed to have purchased all of UNIX from Novell.   
Novell retained the copyrights because SCO didn't have the money to purchase 
all of Unix.  
	The rest of the story is in the below link.  SCO has lost the case, there is 
no Linux in Unix.  Linux is not a derivative of Minux, it used the same file 
system initially for ease of development.  All the proof is in the articles 
and court documents from the below link
Bob Swanson
GNU on the Amiga 2000, 3000, and 4000
Linux since 2000.

Groklaw - Digging for Truth

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list