From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (cthulhu.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.2]) by neteng.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id TAA72838 for <linux-archive@neteng.engr.sgi.com>; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:23:23 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com>
Received: (from majordomo-owner@localhost)
	by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF)
	id TAA25707
	for linux-list;
	Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:22:44 -0800 (PST)
	mail_from (owner-linux@relay.engr.sgi.com)
Received: from sgi.com (sgi.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.37])
	by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF)
	via ESMTP id TAA13196;
	Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:22:40 -0800 (PST)
	mail_from (davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com)
Received: from dm.cobaltmicro.com (dm.cobaltmicro.com [209.133.34.35]) 
	by sgi.com (980327.SGI.8.8.8-aspam/980304.SGI-aspam:
       SGI does not authorize the use of its proprietary
       systems or networks for unsolicited or bulk email
       from the Internet.) 
	via ESMTP id TAA05806; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:22:40 -0800 (PST)
	mail_from (davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com)
Received: (from davem@localhost)
	by dm.cobaltmicro.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA11493;
	Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:21:36 -0800
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:21:36 -0800
Message-Id: <199901160321.TAA11493@dm.cobaltmicro.com>
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com>
To: ralf@uni-koblenz.de
CC: ariel@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com, linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com,
        adevries@engsoc.carleton.ca, richard@infopact.nl
In-reply-to: <19990115225918.25643@uni-koblenz.de> (ralf@uni-koblenz.de)
Subject: Re: linus.linux.sgi.com
References: <369F8C88.39CC6B03@infopact.nl> <199901151909.LAA23245@oz.engr.sgi.com> <19990115225918.25643@uni-koblenz.de>
Sender: owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com
Precedence: bulk

   From: ralf@uni-koblenz.de
   Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 22:59:18 +0100

   Seconded.  SGI (and actually the whole industry) is _W_A_Y_ more
   OSS friendly than /. rumors say.

Although I am a supporter of SGI and I understand their friendlyness
to the community, I do have to state that the rumors and feelings are
unsurprising given that:

1) SGI has no UNIX story (yet) on their new hardware.
2) SGI has no binary compatability story on the new hardware for
   customers who have made an investment in their MIPS line.
   (Sun will be acquiring what SGI has (ability to execute x86
    binaries) in the very near future in their Sparc processors,
    without screwing their customers over the way SGI is at the
    moment... I can't say how they'll do it, but all I can say is
    that they are doing it the right way)

And todays announcement of how much of their MIPS investment stake
they are getting rid of, will only amplify how people feel about the
above.

So if SGI has some exciting news for us OSS people in the pipeline,
and they are just holding off for "the right time", I think this is a
miscalculated delay and will hurt them tremendously.  The sooner the
better, is anyone listening?

Later,
David S. Miller
davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com