[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> How I hate these licensing issues. FUSE is GPL, of course ...
> >
> >should not be a show stopper, imho. Project like this has clear API
> >between kernel and user spaces. GPL is about API implementation, not API
> >declaration.(I guess) As in case of FreeBSD, kernel part and ioctls code
> >needs to be re-written under CDDL, while user part will remain GPL which
> >is legal, AFAIK.
>
>
> Well, I also think that the FS layer is substantially different;
> so a bounce module would need to look different anyway.
I also had the impresseion that the interface differs from what we use in
Solaris.
I have the wich to have such a beast for Solaris since 1990.
Recently, I did have a longer discussion about the related kernel driver
with Frank Hoffman and as long as you omit mmap() support and allow the
kernel driver to forcibly unmont the fs in case a userland FS e.g. dumps
core, then it should not be hard to implement.
For the "wofs" I did write around 1989-1990, I needed to implement swappable
kernel memory. In case such a filesystem would be implemented as a userland
process, it could just call malloc().
In any case, a userland FS would definitely remove the GPL restrictions of
existing implementations and a port to Solaris would make sense.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
