On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 08:54:26PM +0100, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
I see that Pinguy OS, an uber-Ubuntu o/s, includes native ZFS support.
Any pointers to more info on this?
There are some work in progress from http://zfsonlinux.org/, but the posix
layer was still lacking last I checked
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen pa...@iki.fi wrote:
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 08:54:26PM +0100, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
I see that Pinguy OS, an uber-Ubuntu o/s, includes native ZFS support.
Any pointers to more info on this?
There are some work in progress from
On 12.02.2011 18:18, David E. Anderson wrote:
I see that Pinguy OS, an uber-Ubuntu o/s, includes native ZFS support.
Any pointers to more info on this?
Thre are currently three different ways, to get ZFS working on linux.
First the implementation by kqstore. They largly used the work from
I see that Pinguy OS, an uber-Ubuntu o/s, includes native ZFS support.
Any pointers to more info on this?
--
David
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 09:18:26AM -0800, David E. Anderson wrote:
I see that Pinguy OS, an uber-Ubuntu o/s, includes native ZFS support.
Any pointers to more info on this?
Probably using this[1].
Ray
[1] http://kqstor.com/
___
zfs-discuss mailing
Ray Van Dolson wrote:
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 09:18:26AM -0800, David E. Anderson wrote:
I see that Pinguy OS, an uber-Ubuntu o/s, includes native ZFS support.
Any pointers to more info on this?
Probably using this[1].
doubtful.. It's more likely based on
http://zfsonlinux.org/
I see that Pinguy OS, an uber-Ubuntu o/s, includes native ZFS support.
Any pointers to more info on this?
There are some work in progress from http://zfsonlinux.org/, but the posix
layer was still lacking last I checked
Vennlige hilsener / Best regards
roy
--
Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
(+47)
Hi Erik,
Thanks for clarifying it. You are absolutely right. It is a limited beta.
Every one being part of beta program will have access to source code. We
want to have it first validated by a limited number of people, before
opening it to everyone.
Let us know if any one would like to
aa == Anurag Agarwal anu...@kqinfotech.com writes:
aa Every one being part of beta program will have access to
aa source code
...and the right to redistribute it if they like, which I think is
also guaranteed by the license.
Yes, I agree a somewhat formal beta program could be smart
aa == Anurag Agarwal anu...@kqinfotech.com writes:
aa * Currently we are planning to do a closed beta
aa * Source code will be made available with release.
CDDL violation.
aa * We will be providing paid support for our binary
aa releases.
great, so long as your ``binary
This just popped up:
In terms of how native ZFS for Linux is being handled by [KQ
Infotec], they are releasing their ported ZFS code under the Common
Development Distribution License and will not be attempting to go
for mainline integration. Instead, this company will just be
releasing
Hi,
Thanks for posting information about this port here. Just to add few points:
* Currently we are planning to do a closed beta for this port, which is
based on b121, we will be doing a proper release around end of this year,
which will be based on latest build b141. If you are interested in
Peter Jeremy peter.jer...@alcatel-lucent.com wrote:
On 2010-Jun-11 17:41:38 +0800, Joerg Schilling
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote:
PP.S.: Did you know that FreeBSD _includes_ the GPLd Reiserfs in the FreeBSD
kernel since a while and that nobody did complain about this, see e.g.:
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Sorry but your reply is completely misleading as the people who claim that
there is a legal problem with having ZFS in the Linux kernel would of course
also claim that Reiserfs cannot be in the FreeBSD kernel.
It seems that it is a license violation
Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Sorry but your reply is completely misleading as the people who claim that
there is a legal problem with having ZFS in the Linux kernel would of course
also claim that Reiserfs cannot be in
On 2010-Jun-11 17:41:38 +0800, Joerg Schilling
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote:
PP.S.: Did you know that FreeBSD _includes_ the GPLd Reiserfs in the FreeBSD
kernel since a while and that nobody did complain about this, see e.g.:
Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote:
I am really sad to hear you saying these things since if it was all
actually true, then Linux, *BSD, and Solaris distributions could not
legally exist. Thankfully, only part of the above is true.
If linking of independent works would
Op Sat, 12 Jun 2010 12:00:39 +0200 schreef Joerg Schilling
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de:
The main problem with GPL related license debates seems to be that
very few people did read the GPL license text.
Or simply do not want to and just believe what they have been told to be
the
On Sat, 12 Jun 2010, Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
Op Sat, 12 Jun 2010 12:00:39 +0200 schreef Joerg Schilling
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de:
The main problem with GPL related license debates seems to be that
very few people did read the GPL license text.
Or simply do not want to and just
On 6/10/2010 9:04 PM, Rodrigo E. De León Plicet
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Anurag
Agarwalanu...@kqinfotech.com wrote:
We at KQInfotech, initially started on an
independent port of ZFS to linux.
When we posted our progress about port last year,
then we came to know
On Jun 11, 2010, at 10:43, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Jason King ja...@ansipunx.net wrote:
Well technically they could start with the GRUB zfs code, which is
GPL
licensed, but I don't think that's the case.
As explained in depth in a previous posting, there is absolutely no
legal
problem
Alex Blewitt alex.blew...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 11, 2010, at 10:43, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Jason King ja...@ansipunx.net wrote:
Well technically they could start with the GRUB zfs code, which is
GPL
licensed, but I don't think that's the case.
As explained in depth in a
On 6/11/2010 3:03 AM, joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote:
Alex Blewittalex.blew...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 11, 2010, at 10:43, Joerg Schilling wrote:
As explained in depth in a previous posting, there is absolutely no
legal
problem with putting the CDDLd original ZFS
On Jun 11, 2010, at 11:03, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Alex Blewitt alex.blew...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 11, 2010, at 10:43, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Jason King ja...@ansipunx.net wrote:
Well technically they could start with the GRUB zfs code, which is
GPL
licensed, but I don't think that's the
Erik Trimble erik.trim...@oracle.com wrote:
I don't want to restart something here on this list - I just wanted to
make sure that the original developers understood that there are very
possibly issues using CDDL code in conjunction with GPL'd code. If they
are indeed using OpenSolaris ZFS
Alex Blewitt alex.blew...@gmail.com wrote:
The GPL doesn't prevent you doing things. However, it does withdraw
the agreement that you are permitted to copy someone else's work if
you do those things. So whilst one can compile and link code together,
you may not have the rights to use
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 6/11/2010 12:32 AM, Erik Trimble wrote:
On 6/10/2010 9:04 PM, Rodrigo E. De León Plicet wrote:
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Anurag Agarwalanu...@kqinfotech.com
wrote:
We at KQInfotech, initially started on an independent port of ZFS to
On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 11:41 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
I am aware of (and this are many) explain, linking
against an independent work creates a collective work and no
derivative work.
The GPL would only hit if a derivative work was created but even under
US
Copyright law, a derivative
On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Jason King ja...@ansipunx.net wrote:
Well technically they could start with the GRUB zfs code, which is GPL
licensed, but I don't think that's the case.
As explained in depth in a previous posting, there is absolutely no legal
problem with putting
On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Kyle McDonald wrote:
If the developers distribute source code, which is then compiled and
linked to the GPL code by the *end-user* then there are no issues, since
the person combining the 2 codebases is not distributing the combined
work further.
This is absolutely always
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 9:32 PM, Erik Trimble erik.trim...@oracle.comwrote:
On 6/10/2010 9:04 PM, Rodrigo E. De León Plicet wrote:
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Anurag Agarwalanu...@kqinfotech.com
wrote:
We at KQInfotech, initially started on an independent port of ZFS to
linux.
When
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 2:50 AM, Alex Blewitt alex.blew...@gmail.com wrote:
You are sadly mistaken.
From GNU.org on license compatibilities:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL), version 1.0
This is a free software
gd == Garrett D'Amore garr...@nexenta.com writes:
gd There are numerous people in the community that have indicated
gd that they believe that such linking creates a *derivative*
gd work. Donald Becker has made this claim rather forcefully.
yes, I think he has a point. The reality
On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Freddie Cash wrote:
I don't mean to be a PITA, but I'm assuming that someone lawyerly
has had the appropriate discussions with the porting team about how
linking against the GPL'd Linux kernel means your kernel module has
to be GPL-compatible. It doesn't matter if you
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Freddie Cash wrote:
For the record, the following paragraph was incorrectly quoted by Bob. This
paragraph was originally written by Erik Trimble:
I don't mean to be a PITA, but I'm
On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Freddie Cash wrote:
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Freddie Cash wrote:
For the record, the following paragraph was incorrectly quoted by Bob. This
paragraph was originally
It would not
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Anurag Agarwal anu...@kqinfotech.com wrote:
We at KQInfotech, initially started on an independent port of ZFS to linux.
When we posted our progress about port last year, then we came to know about
the work on LLNL port. Since then we started working on to re-base
On 6/10/2010 9:04 PM, Rodrigo E. De León Plicet wrote:
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Anurag Agarwalanu...@kqinfotech.com wrote:
We at KQInfotech, initially started on an independent port of ZFS to linux.
When we posted our progress about port last year, then we came to know about
the
I'm very excited. Throw some code up on github as soon as you are able. I'm
sure there are plenty of people (me) that would like to help test it out. I've
already been playing around with ZFS using zvol on Fedora 12. I would love to
have a ZPL, no matter how experimental.
--
This message
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 11:32 PM, Erik Trimble erik.trim...@oracle.com wrote:
On 6/10/2010 9:04 PM, Rodrigo E. De León Plicet wrote:
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Anurag Agarwalanu...@kqinfotech.com
wrote:
We at KQInfotech, initially started on an independent port of ZFS to
linux.
When
A very interesting video from DebConf, which addresses CDDL and GPL
incompatibility issues, and some original reasoning behind CDDL usage:
http://caesar.acc.umu.se/pub/debian-meetings/2006/debconf6/theora-small/2006-05-14/tower/OpenSolaris_Java_and_Debian-Simon_Phipps__Alvaro_Lopez_Ortega.ogg
--
Hillel Lubman shtetl...@gmail.com wrote:
A very interesting video from DebConf, which addresses CDDL and GPL
incompatibility issues, and some original reasoning behind CDDL usage:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
This viedo is not interesting, it is wrong.
Danese Cooper claims incorrect things and her claims have already been
verified wrong by Simon Phipps.
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=55013#55008
Hope this helps.
Jörg
I see it's a pretty heated
Hi Brandon,
Thanks for providing update on this.
We at KQInfotech, initially started on an independent port of ZFS to linux.
When we posted our progress about port last year, then we came to know about
the work on LLNL port. Since then we started working on to re-base our
changing on top Brian's
http://www.osnews.com/story/23416/Native_ZFS_Port_for_Linux
Native ZFS Port for Linux
posted by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th Jun 2010 10:15 UTC, submitted by kragil
Employees of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory have ported
Sun's/Oracle's ZFS natively to Linux. Linux already had a ZFS port in
Thanks for posting this, but these two sentences seem to contradict each other:
Employees of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory have ported
Sun's/Oracle's ZFS natively to Linux.
The ZFS Posix Layer has not been implemented yet, therefore mounting
file systems is not yet possible
Not to be
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Fredrich Maney fredrichma...@gmail.com wrote:
Not to be too harsh, but as long as you can't mount filesystems, it
seems to just be hype/vaporware to me.
It's a big step in the right direction.
You can still use zvols to create ext3 filesystems, and use the zpool
Native ZFS for Linux
Very good to see that there is such effort in progress.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
48 matches
Mail list logo
