Re: [OpenAFS] OpenAFS vs IBM AFS
On 8/12/2022 2:01 PM, Ben Huntsman (b...@huntsmans.net) wrote: That is about what I thought. I guess I ask because for those of us who work more with AIX than the other platforms, it would be interesting and valuable to be able to track the IBM code base as well, even if that were kept in a separate repository from OpenAFS. I'm not sure how tracking the IBM code base is all that helpful. The IBM AFS client does not support new RPCs added to OpenAFS nor does it include the most of the other changes. In the end its the developer time and access to AIX systems and development tools that are required to support an AFS client and server. If there is an end user community for an AIX AFS client, then it would be helpful if that community would provide resources to OpenAFS to make it happen. I'm also very interested in what it took to clean the code base to achieve the 1.0 release. I know some things were removed such as that washtool thing, and the special version of AIX's fsck that is AFS-aware. The primary changes were to remove code that IBM didn't have permission to re-license, comments that referenced customers, or functionality that was specific to certain private builds, and any references to individuals by name. There was more but that was the practical work. Reviewing a million line code base so legal can sign off on things is a lot of work. But that was a long time ago. I wonder if times have changed and if there would be fewer legal and technical hurdles to releasing some of those things? I doubt it. All of the original work would need to be repeated. The AIX AFS-aware fsck would be worthwhile even now. I disagree. In OpenAFS any validation of the contents of the Volume Group object stores located in the vice partition file systems should be performed by the on-demand salvager. There should be no need to run an external tool while the services are shutdown. Jeffrey Altman smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [OpenAFS] OpenAFS vs IBM AFS
Hi Jeffrey- Thanks for the reply! That is about what I thought. I guess I ask because for those of us who work more with AIX than the other platforms, it would be interesting and valuable to be able to track the IBM code base as well, even if that were kept in a separate repository from OpenAFS. I'm also very interested in what it took to clean the code base to achieve the 1.0 release. I know some things were removed such as that washtool thing, and the special version of AIX's fsck that is AFS-aware. But that was a long time ago. I wonder if times have changed and if there would be fewer legal and technical hurdles to releasing some of those things? The AIX AFS-aware fsck would be worthwhile even now. Anyway, thanks again! -Ben From: Jeffrey E Altman Sent: Friday, August 12, 2022 10:32 AM To: Ben Huntsman; openafs-info@openafs.org Subject: Re: [OpenAFS] OpenAFS vs IBM AFS On 8/12/2022 12:50 PM, Ben Huntsman (b...@huntsmans.net<mailto:b...@huntsmans.net>) wrote: Hi guys- So I know IBM released the AFS code to the community at the beginning and that is what became OpenAFS. But from various release notes on the IBM site, it would seem that IBM continued (and continues) to develop its own AFS internally as well. Does anyone know how far the IBM vs OpenAFS code bases have diverged? I know they at least have more AIX ports than the OpenAFS code currently does... IBM released OpenAFS 1.0 on 31 Oct 2000. That release was a fork from IBM AFS 3.6. The fork itself at this point was substantial. IBM had to clean the code base before it could be released. The diff stat between these releases was not inconsequential. IBM has continued development of IBM AFS 3.6. There has been no effort to synchronize with OpenAFS. They are very much independent creatures at this point. Since the openafs-ibm-1_0 release OpenAFS has undergone substantial change 6127 files changed, 1308387 insertions(+), 567306 deletions(-) Does anyone know anyone at IBM that could be asked if IBM would be willing to re-contribute it's current codebase? Yes we know people and they know us. It wouldn't be worth asking.There is simply too much churn to merge code changes. At best, concepts and features added to IBM AFS 3.6pXXX could be re-implemented in OpenAFS. Jeffrey Altman
Re: [OpenAFS] OpenAFS vs IBM AFS
On 8/12/2022 12:50 PM, Ben Huntsman (b...@huntsmans.net) wrote: Hi guys- So I know IBM released the AFS code to the community at the beginning and that is what became OpenAFS. But from various release notes on the IBM site, it would seem that IBM continued (and continues) to develop its own AFS internally as well. Does anyone know how far the IBM vs OpenAFS code bases have diverged? I know they at least have more AIX ports than the OpenAFS code currently does... IBM released OpenAFS 1.0 on 31 Oct 2000. That release was a fork from IBM AFS 3.6. The fork itself at this point was substantial. IBM had to clean the code base before it could be released. The diff stat between these releases was not inconsequential. IBM has continued development of IBM AFS 3.6. There has been no effort to synchronize with OpenAFS. They are very much independent creatures at this point. Since the openafs-ibm-1_0 release OpenAFS has undergone substantial change 6127 files changed, 1308387 insertions(+), 567306 deletions(-) Does anyone know anyone at IBM that could be asked if IBM would be willing to re-contribute it's current codebase? Yes we know people and they know us. It wouldn't be worth asking. There is simply too much churn to merge code changes. At best, concepts and features added to IBM AFS 3.6pXXX could be re-implemented in OpenAFS. Jeffrey Altman smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
