Week 2, Day 10 of SCO v. Novell - Chris Stone, O'Gara, Maciaszek, Nagle

 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Special Forums News, Links, Events and Announcements UNIX and Linux RSS News Week 2, Day 10 of SCO v. Novell - Chris Stone, O'Gara, Maciaszek, Nagle
# 1  
Old 03-20-2010
Week 2, Day 10 of SCO v. Novell - Chris Stone, O'Gara, Maciaszek, Nagle

Friday at the jury trial of SCO v. Novell, Chris Stone testified, and despite valiant efforts by SCO's Stuart Singer to make the phone call with Maureen O'Gara seem somehow scandalous, he handled himself professionally and apparently made the her allegations look inacccurate at best. He testified that he didn't tell her Novell was issuing a press release. She already knew. As for the call, he says he mostly listened.
The big news is that he says he's a venture capitalist now, and he was recently approached by none other than Darl McBride, contacting him about investing in his startup, and McBride allegedly told Stone he wouldn't have to worry about "that O'Gara business". Can you imagine the gall? Mr. Stone was surprised, naturally. And then her deposition was played, with the jury giggling, minus the part about "war pay" but including her "jab at PJ" remarks, and then John Maciaszek testified, and then Andrew Nagle was on the stand to talk about copyright notices in UnixWare. He testified that Novell changed the copyright notices to say Santa Cruz after the APA. When Novell puts on its case, I expect they'll demonstrate that at a minimum, they must have missed some then. But I don't really think UnixWare is any major issue to Novell. Nagle also admitted that the phrase "intellectual property" can also mean source code. Michael Jacobs got a number of answers on the record that Nagle probably doesn't know will matter when Novell begins its case next week, but I noticed foreshadowing.

More...
Login or Register to Ask a Question

Previous Thread | Next Thread
Login or Register to Ask a Question
CFREE(3)						     Linux Programmer's Manual							  CFREE(3)

NAME
cfree - free allocated memory SYNOPSIS
#include <stdlib.h> /* In SunOS 4 */ int cfree(void *ptr); /* In glibc or FreeBSD libcompat */ void cfree(void *ptr); /* In SCO OpenServer */ void cfree(char *ptr, unsigned num, unsigned size); /* In Solaris watchmalloc.so.1 */ void cfree(void *ptr, size_t nelem, size_t elsize); Feature Test Macro Requirements for glibc (see feature_test_macros(7)): cfree(): _BSD_SOURCE || _SVID_SOURCE DESCRIPTION
This function should never be used. Use free(3) instead. 1-arg cfree In glibc, the function cfree() is a synonym for free(3), "added for compatibility with SunOS". Other systems have other functions with this name. The declaration is sometimes in <stdlib.h> and sometimes in <malloc.h>. 3-arg cfree Some SCO and Solaris versions have malloc libraries with a 3-argument cfree(), apparently as an analog to calloc(3). If you need it while porting something, add #define cfree(p, n, s) free((p)) to your file. A frequently asked question is "Can I use free(3) to free memory allocated with calloc(3), or do I need cfree()?" Answer: use free(3). An SCO manual writes: "The cfree routine is provided for compliance to the iBCSe2 standard and simply calls free. The num and size argu- ments to cfree are not used." RETURN VALUE
The SunOS version of cfree() (which is a synonym for free(3)) returns 1 on success and 0 on failure. In case of error, errno is set to EINVAL: the value of ptr was not a pointer to a block previously allocated by one of the routines in the malloc(3) family. CONFORMING TO
The 3-argument version of cfree() as used by SCO conforms to the iBCSe2 standard: Intel386 Binary Compatibility Specification, Edition 2. SEE ALSO
malloc(3) COLOPHON
This page is part of release 3.44 of the Linux man-pages project. A description of the project, and information about reporting bugs, can be found at http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/. 2007-07-26 CFREE(3)