Talk:Caldera Smallfoot

message: Just read the Linux, SCO-Linux controversies, and finally, the Timeline of SCO-Linux controversies. This project is notable because it shows that even the SCO projects were affected by the lawsuit. Now what about the rival projects of other vendors that  Caldera SCO was trying to squeeze? Clearly, they would have been affected had Caldera SCO prevailed, as was possible in 2003. There would have been a multi-billion dollar impact on rival companies had SCO Caldera prevailed. --Ancheta Wis 00:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I believe this project is notable. 

message: Yes, I think this is notable.
SCaldera had a perfect place in the market to take on Linux and go far further than RedHat or SuSE with OpenLinux. Smallfoot should have had a really strong influence in the market place - had it not gotten killed off.
Of course, its also the ONLY SCO PRODUCT to have both UNIX and LINUX versions. 
JPNZ  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.188.179.212 (talk) 18:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Noteable 

message: Looks like some of this has been ripped from my Linked In page by enthusiastic wikiphiles !
86.3.241.206 (talk) 23:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What "linked in page"? If it's a copyright violation, you are welcome to remove the content as long as you include proper evidence in your edit summary. -- intgr [talk] 23:25, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heh.... 

message: UNIX and Linux versions?  Not that Jack designed with me... Jack, you been promiscuous?  The Smallfoot Toolkit was written for Linux; after cancellation, there was a script-hack built, but I don't believe it reached beta stage.  SFL was how I "cut my teeth" on Trolltech software, since it leveraged a licensed Qt2 or Qt3 baseline for string-handling, XML, and generators for the various unpacks and builds.
It's notable, too, that the product was built to work with 2.4 and 2.6 -series kernels, but did not ship that code; rather, it knew where to download it from, and knows how to configure it and start a build -- this is similar to BuildRoot, and (I think) OpenEmbedded.  No Linux Kernel code was included in the release.  Linux testing was considered on LKP, but we were able to do a kernel-build on UNIX with the EDG toolchain so long as we softlinked the kernel pathname to something very short (I think we used /k) because UnixWare had very short commandline limits (1024 characters or such).
The KernelBuilder classes for the SFL were notable as well because they didn't necessarily know how to configure a kernel, but they relied on "kernel needs XXX" markers; these were based on exhaustive runs of building the linux kernel, then sampling its available symbols and other black-box probing of the built result to see what effect +/- a given parameter made.  There was a half-dozen parameters we had to "teach" the KernelBuilder, which KernelBuilder_2_6 inherited from KernelBuilder_2_4, but then I had 3 or 4 servers on a bone-simple ONC/RPC daemon to clean/unpack/build/scan/report iterative builds.  Each new point-release of the kernel took just over a week to build, and there was roughly 2080 parameters.  Remember too that LKP at the time ran 3x as fast as Linux, until Linux truly exploited the fine-grained locking and the Syquest CopyOnWrite edit that IBM put in.  After that, it was nearly faster to netboot a clean Linux image on a netbooted builder to ensure that the environment was clean and trivial.  The manager for the builders could parse a Kconfig, except for some typos -- that used Kernel code, so if I released it publically, I'd need to honour GPLv2.  I didn't release it.
We also looked at 2.2 for its compact build size -- a functional kernel, but really small.
Allan Clark (allanc@chickenandporn.com | allanc@trolltech.com | allanc@sco.com)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.120.219 (talk) 15:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corrections 

message: I'd also point out that the Smallfoot Toolkit (SFT) did not distribute GPL code -- it downloaded it and verified checksums like anyone else (well known practices by Busybox, uCLibc, etc).  This was done to reduce the distribution image, not to evade any license.  Source: I'm Allan Clark, who designed the C++/QT build engines in SCO NJ.  
Allan Clark (allanc@chickenandporn.com | allanc@trolltech.com | allanc@sco.com)  —Preceding unsigned  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.172.103.206 (talk) 19:08, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linux Source versus GPL? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Smallfoot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061017020138/http://ir.sco.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=99268 to http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=99268
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20010918080028/http://www.newsforge.com:80/article.pl?sid=01/06/19/1755242&mode=thread to http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=01/06/19/1755242&mode=thread
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080124024723/http://ir.sco.com:80/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=99268 to http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=99268
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:32, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Smallfoot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060717210358/http://www.dc-center.com:80/uk/ca/files/Budgens_case_study.pdf to http://www.dc-center.com/uk/ca/files/Budgens_case_study.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:26, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm not sure that this should be considered the "primary topic" by this name, now that a successful animated feature film called Smallfoot has been released. I'd propose moving this article to Smallfoot (operating system) or something similar. I'm not familiar with the topic, so I don't know exactly what the best name for the article would be. Feel free to add suggestions, if anyone has any. --Jpcase (talk) 18:12, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should this be moved to Smallfoot (operating system)? Or something similar?