MSDOS/UNIX Sources

[Tim Smith]

In article <2229 at nsc.UUCP> chuqui at nsc.UUCP (Chuqui Q. Koala) writes:
>AT&T licensing is on a per CPU license. Those 40-80 hackers all need to be
>able to share a single computer, or do something to allow multiple CPU's
>(#2 is, I believe $16K, #3-n $1k under contractors provisions). Otherwise,
>you're STILL illegal.
>

How are multi-CPU computers gonna fit in?  Will it really cost
more to get a source license for an N cpu system, when they
are running as one computer?

Imagine the kludges needed for a company that can only afford one
source license!  I can see it now...

open( some args... )
{
	.
	.
	.
	if ( ip->st_mode & S_SRCFILE )
		p->p_srccnt++;
	.
	.
}

sched()
{
	.
	.
	if ( p->p_srccnt )
		if ( available[SRCCPU] == NO )
			goto schedloop;		/*
						 * Every vital kernel routine
						 * is required to have a goto!
						 */
		else
			cpu = SRCCPU;
	else
		cpu = select_cpu();
	.
	.
}

:-)

And how do networks fit in?  The machines I am on at Callan are
hooked up with Ethernet.  When I am going to edit a source file,
I usually copy it from the development system to my office system.
I also compile it and test it on my office system.
Then, when I am done with it, I send it back and rm it from my system.
Is this a violation of the license?

And how about smart terminals?  Suppose I had an editor that down-
loaded the file to be edited into the terminal, and the editing
is done by the terminal, with the changes uploaded to the host?
Does this violate the license?
-- 
Duty Now for the Future
					Tim Smith
			ihnp4!wlbr!callan!tim or ihnp4!cithep!tim