X.org servers update closes 2 security holes, adds neat component tweaks

X.org has released a bunch of updates, which includes closing two security holes and, yes, this affects Wayland users too. A batch of updates to X.org's suite of X11 servers and components just appeared. Among the new features, there were also fixes for two security holes mentioned in an X.org Foundation security advisory, …

[Tom 38]

(wayland works just fine on FreeBSD)

[Liam Proven]

I was not aware of that!

OK, I will ask the editors to amend that detail. Thanks for the correction.

[Steve Graham]

I use Linux and the keyboard driver. I never got the alternate, evdev, to work properly, so I didn't bother to pursue it.

[gerryg]

Water under the bridge now

But you might recall the zombie lawsuit claiming that SCO owned the word UNIX. I believe it was even reported on here. But this is the first time I have become aware of the El Reg story reporting in the transfer of the name to the Open Group. Though the article only specifically mentions the patent.

[Liam Proven]

Re: Water under the bridge now

[Author here]

Yes, I have mentioned this a few times in various online fora and people react with shock.

When Novell was riding high, it bought Unix System Labs from AT&T. It wanted the code, not the name, so it donated the name to the Open Group.

But the code wasn't worth much in the end.

Many Linux and FOSS people have this 1980s understanding: "it's Unix if it's based on AT&T code, otherwise it's just Unix-like."

That was true about the time Linux was first being developed but has not been true for approximately 30 years.

Nothing very substantial or important uses AT&T code any more. Proprietary Unix is largely dead and continues to decline in relevance.

macOS contains BSD code, excluding most of the kernel. BSD by definition is Unix with the AT&T copyright bits taken out.

The BSDs contain BSD code, including the kernel.

Solaris, AIX and HP/UX are waning.

But since ~1993, if something passes Open Group tests, *it is Unix.*

[herman]

Exchange

Something that The Open Group may not be very proud of is that they wrote the original MS Exchange. So now you know who to blame for that: UNIX.

[Liam Proven]

Re: Exchange

[Citation needed]

I do not think that is true in any way.

Exchange used the X.400 directory service, but it is not based on any code from it that I know of.

The storage engine of Exchange is MS Jet, which is (intentionally over-simplifying) an embedded version of the MS Access database engine.

The mail handling is new, but before Exchange, MS sold 2 versions of MS Mail.

MS Mail 1 & 2 was written in-house and was originally a Mac product.

MS Mail 2.1 and onwards were based on Network Courier, a product MS bought in. (An early instance of less-than-honest MS version numbering!)

I deployed both of these in production.

After buying in a replacement, MS Mail 1/2 was sold off.

So MS did have mail-handling and routing experience. I think its own engine was coupled to the in-house database engine.

Shame it didn't use SQL Server, which was also bought in (from Sybase) and is IMHO a better engine.