This may seem a bit off topic for this list, but for me, as a newbie, it does involve understanding some things about Linux. I hope it doesn't cause any flame wars or anything. Anyway: I understand that SCO's claims concern only the 2.4.x kernel and later (i.e., the 2.5.x and thus upcoming 2.6 as well). I just don't quite understand how this represents such a threat to Linux: Linux already has solid, working kernels in the 2.0.x branch and the 2.2.x branch. If the very worst came about (I have a hard time seeing how anything worse than maybe removal of some code and some fines being issued, but, for the sake of discussion . . .) and the 2.4.x kernel series became off limits, couldn't development on the 2.2.x and maybe even 2.0.x kernels continue and perhaps fill the needs the 2.4.x kernel now fulfills? I guess 2.0.x can't be made to support USB, so that kind of makes it a less feasible option. If I could put my inquiry into the form of a succinct question it would be: what does the 2.4.x kernel do that 2.2.x can't do? Isn't it kind of insignificant from the perspective of the average computer user whether they use a 2.2.x or 2.4.x kernel? And, relatedly: isn't alot of the stir over how this could adversely affect Linux based on consideration of Linux's adoption in the business or corporate worlds, where there are some very specialized computing needs? Or maybe it's seen as a setback for Linux running on the leading edge hardware, like 64 bit processors? Thanks for any help in understanding how this could affect my world, i.e., the world of the average computer user/tinkerer.
James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs
