It's not necessarily that simple. It might be for KFC and Dominoes, but
for others, SCO is not the complete story. Many legacy systems are
written in COBOL, and must pay a per-seat licence for that on top of the
per-seat licence for UNIX. It is these systems that are most attracted
towards SCO compatibility.
It still adds up to something that nobody can perceive, not even using a
very fine stopwatch and counting over a period of years.
No. Very few people can add it, easily or otherwise. Perhaps KFC could
employ somebody to add it, but they'd more likely be able to convert
their entire software stack instead. The paint shops and mechanics of
the world would have little chance of that.
Yes, I agree. Neither side of this issue is of great moment. On the
one hand we have something that's half-baked at best; on the other hand
we want to remove it for non perceivable gain or benefit.
No, I don't see this as headline making material. The existing code,
though, is a rough spot in the kernel. So long as it's there, somebody
will feel the need to scratch it, as you do. Absent the choice of
removing the code, and the only way left to scratch is to complete it.
Remove the code and there's nothing there that itches, which is a bad
thing in this case.
--
