On Friday, 2 June 2006 at 5:04:15 -0500, Kevin Kinsey wrote: > Travis H. wrote: >> >> Is there some kind of IP lawsuit over vinum or something? > > If so, it's never been mentioned ;-)
It has now, but it's the first time I've heard of it. > It's a valid question, but I don't think Greg's that kind of guy. > As for Veritas, I *think* they had some sort of agreement (re: the > name), (but I could be blowing smoke there); IIRC, vinum(8) was > "patterned after the idea of" the Veritas software, and not in any > way a "copy" or "clone" of it.... In fact, I never asked VERITAS. I only modelled Vinum on VxVM, anyway; there are big differences. In any case, there was one IP issue at the very beginning: I developed the RAID-5 functionality under contract with Cybernet Inc., and part of that agreement was that I would not release it until 18 months after it became functional. That time has long passed, and RAID-5 has of course been released. There have never been any conflicts arising from IP issues, neither with Cybernet, VERITAS, myself or anybody else. > As others have stated, vinum has been replaced by "gvinum". Greg > had stated in the past that the GEOM layer's introduction had "badly > broken vinum", so I'm guessing that vinum was removed so that no one > would attempt to use it on a newer system and get "unexpected" > results. The original intention was to modify Vinum to work with GEOM. Lukas did the work, and he chose to rewrite significant parts of it, and also to rename it. I disagreed with both of these decisions (see the problems they've caused, like what's being discussed here), but he's the man, and he gets to call the shots. Greg -- When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients. If you don't, I may ignore the reply or reply to the original recipients. For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
Description: PGP signature