See also: last week's Back page page.

Linux links of the week

It is nice to see that the GNU echo command has finally gotten some proper documentation.

Section Editor: Jon Corbet

Letters to the editor

From: "Tery Hamer" <tery.hamer@virgin.net>
To: <letters@lwn.net>
Subject: Dedication
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 22:26:33 +0100

I've just received my Oracle Technology Network Evaluation copy of Oracle8i
CD via DHL. (Thankyou! Thankyou! Thankyou!)

Now for the joys of trying to install it, configure it, figure it out, etc
on Red Hat and SuSe.

But I noticed that the Oracle CD label is "Release 8.1.5 for Linus"

Aw.  Isn't that sweet!

tery

From: "Matt.Wilkie" <Matt.Wilkie@gov.yk.ca>
To: esr@snark.thyrsus.com
Cc: letters@lwn.net
Subject: ESR's 'Will You Be Cracked Next?'
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 16:46:00 -0700

Hi Eric,

I normally await with interest your next piece. Usually they
are thought provoking and promote content over hype.
However in "Will you be cracked next?" I feel you have 
begun to blur the line and are slipping into marketspeak.

The phrase which raised my hackles was:

"Non-Microsoft operating systems such as Linux are 
invulnerable to macro attacks, immune to viruses, and can 
laugh at Back Orifice."

This statement while factually accurate, is misleading
(according to my understanding anyway - I am not a 
security expert). Yes Linux is immune to viruses; I have no
idea about macro attacks. Although Linux can laugh at
Back Orifice itself, Linux is -not- immune to a BO
style of attack: a trojan wrapped inside an innocuous
program which the recipient/user does want to run.
(rootkits anyone?)

Not to take away from the main point of the piece: 
monocultures are by their very nature more suceptible to
(epidemic) disease. 

I couldn't agree more wholeheartedly. I just wish your 
writing was less hyped. In this world of mucho over 
hypedness, even the smallest application makes me dig 
for my salt cubes. ;-)

cheers,

-matt 

Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1999 19:32:02 +0100 (BST)
From: Richard Simpson <rs@rcsimpson.CutThisOut.demon.co.uk>
To: letters@lwn.net
Subject: Intellectual property

Sir,

We read much these days of the threat posed to the open source community
by software patents.  I realise that patent law is fiendishly
complicated and that there are critical differences between the
rules here in Europe and those in the USA, but we really need
an authoritative legal opinion on some of the questions which relate
specifically to open-source software and particularly that which is
non-commercial.  For example:

+ I thought (possibly naively) that patents give exclusive rights to the
commercial exploitation of an idea.  If I give software away for free then
I am not commercially exploiting it and therefore not infringing the
patent.  Right?  Wrong?  Only true in some countries?

+ If software has been developed by 50 different people spread all over
the world then who do you sue?

Questions of this nature tend to produce numerous responses which begin
"I'm not a patent lawyer, but it seems to me...". Well, frankly, these are
not a lot of use.  I guess most patent experts are far too busy making
loads of money to bother with Linux, but surely there is a LWN reader who
is related to a suitable expert.

If we do have a problem with intellectual property then perhaps we need to
start creating a counter strategy.  Fortunately, we have one extremely
powerful weapon in our armory - The Internet.  Can I propose that we
create some software which will allow developers to establish a virtual
presence in a legally untouchable country and communicate via a secure
channel.  Patent owners will then not be able to find out who developed
the software - so they won't be able to sue and if we choose the host
county correctly (somewhere like Nigeria or China) then they won't be able
to get the site shut down.  Obviously, such a system would make it easier
for US developers to cooperate in international cryptography work, but due
to the same laws it would initialy have to be developed outside the USA.

Thank you,
	Richard Simpson

---
Richard Simpson @ home
Linux - Where do you want to go tomorrow?
www.linux.org

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 14:46:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Clemmitt Sigler <siglercm@alphamb2.phys.vt.edu>
To: letters@lwn.net
Subject: Trillian versus Monterey.

Hi,

I've been reading the same web pages as most everybody else about Trillian
(Linux on IA-64) and Monterey (new commercial Unix flavor designed for
IA-64 and supported by IBM, Compaq, and SCO). I guess it's confusing for
Linux users to understand at first why someone like IBM would pour
resources into both projects.  Lots of us would expect Linux to displace a
closed source OS like Monterey in short order.  But it makes business
sense if you look at it another way.

There are any number of companies that shy away from Linux because of its
Open Source nature.  As a result, the Monterey devleopers see the ability
to sell and/or support *more* Unix by backing both Trillian and Monterey.  
Companies looking for "traditional" solutions can go for Monterey. Those
who recognize the power and utility of Linux will have Trillian there for
them, and they can buy support from a mainstream hardware/OS vendor if
they want to.  More Unix is used, and everybody wins.  It's a case of "A
rising tide raises all boats in the harbor."

It looks like the only real loser if this scenario plays out will be
Microsoft because the penetration of NT won't be as high as they
originally hoped for, and even at that NT penetration will probably
increase somewhat from current levels as time goes on.  But even if
upcoming versions of NT are better than the present, the crack that was
opened in the door allowed Linux and Unix to step in, push it open, and
gain market share.

					Clemmitt Sigler