SCO recently told the court with a straight face that "it is undisputed that SCO did not modify Linux". Well. I don't think that word means what SCO thinks it means.
Here's something for the historical record on planet Earth. First, from the Linux kernel, 2.6.18, something that Groklaw's tredman found, a comment:
Original development of Linux SMP code supported by Caldera.
For verification of the comment, copyright notices, and more on SCO's contributions, tredman has a fine collection.
SCO seems to have grave difficulty remembering what Santa Cruz and Caldera used to do, but happily Groklaw is here to lend a hand.
As for Santa Cruz, you'll find a then-Santa Cruz employee Tigran Aivazian in the credits list also in that same section:
Tigran Aivazian: fixed "0.00 in /proc/uptime on
As Groklaw reported years ago in 2003 when the farce began, he was a Santa Cruz employee who made many kernel contributions and he told Groklaw that he made the contributions to SMP as an employee and with his boss's knowledge and approval.
Caldera employees made contributions to the kernel too, on the job. For Christoph Hellwig's contributions while he was a Caldera employee, go here and here, the latter link providing evidence his contributions were also official and providing a link to a Bradley Kuhn quotation that SCO assigned some of its copyrights to FSF in some cases, which tells one that when there is no copyright in the kernel, it may just indicate that the copyright was assigned to another entity or individual. Kuhn:
"Indeed, FSF holds documents from SCO regarding some of this code. SCO has disclaimed copyright on changes that were submitted and assigned by their employees to key GNU operating system components. Why would SCO itself allow their employees to assign copyright to FSF, and perhaps release SCO's supposed 'valuable proprietary trade secrets' in this way?"
Finally, here's a collection of research Dr. Stupid, Alex Roston, Rand McNatt, nw and I did in 2003 refuting SCO Group's claim that it never "authorized, approved or knowingly released" RCU, JFS, NUMA and SMP in Linux, research Groklaw's readers then built on. For more copyright notices, Groklaw member sk43 found some here and here and here. Anonymous contributes this one.
As for SCO's new claim (raised for the first time so far as I can tell in the Reply Memorandum) that Linus used Sun manuals when writing the kernel, here's some research I did, which indicates to me that SCO has just leaped off the BSD cliff again.
Which has a way of making them go splat.
Update: An anonymous reader found this:
Nobody responded with a source for the POSIX standards, so I went to Plan B. I tracked down the manuals for the Sun Microsystems version of Unix at the university, which was operating a Sun server. The manuals contained a basic version of the system calls that was good enough to help me get by. It was possible to look at the manual pages to see what the system call was supposed to do, and then set about the task of implementing it from there. The manual pages didn't say how to do it, they just said what the end results were. I also gleaned some of the system calls from Andrew Tanenbaum's book and a few others. Eventually someone sent me the thick books containing the POSIX standards.
Chapter 6, pages 79-80. "Just for Fun" ISBN 1-58799-080-6
Even better. You'd think SCO would have at least read Linus' book.