Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!sco!wul
From: wul@sco.COM (Wu Liu)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix.sco
Subject: Re: Korn Shell is NOT public domain! <was: Korn shell on sco>
Message-ID: <10968@scolex.sco.COM>
Date: 25 Mar 91 05:26:57 GMT
References: <18356@milton.u.washington.edu> <13@hlthnt.UUCP> <9103181956.AA21609@heron.qz.se>
Sender: news@sco.COM
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Lines: 30


/--s1039@heron.qz.se (Lars Magnusson) said...
| In article <268@raysnec.UUCP> you write:
| >	Perhaps this little mantra should go in the FAQ. Yes, KSH is a
| >nice shell. Yes, more vendors have chosen to offer it. No, you can't have the
| >source code - not legally, anyway - unless you license it. Same goes for
| >binaries. 
| 
| Worked in Denmark some years ago, where I succeded to get our salesrep.
| from an ex-AT&T-partner (OLI, who else) to deliver ksh binary to our
| 3B2's, and as I understood, didn't AT&T care, if they gave away it
| as long it weren't in source. And if so, with a price of 3000 from the
| AT&T Toolchest (what ever that is), the vendors definily could give us
| the true ksh in the bargin. Start pesting the vendors with demands that
| ksh is include instead of bsh, as it should. SCO and SUN are some of
| those that could do better (or could have done earlier). In Europe
| the situation normaly is worse, since we gets the updates approx. 
| 1 year after US in many cases.
\--

From what I understand of AT&T Toolchest policy, you can obtain the
source code and a site license for KSH for some amount of money (I
guess $3000).  Note that this is only a site license; you're not
supposed to sell or hand out copies of the binaries you produce.
The cost for a binary distribution license is more (I seem to recall
$10,000, although it's probably higher).  It's certainly not free.

I use ksh, and I like it a lot.  I do wish SCO had provided KSH
prior to Unix 3.2v2 and the upcoming Xenix 2.3.4, but I guess it's
better late than never...