On Sun, 15 Jan 2012, Toby Thain wrote:
Rumours have long circulated, even before the brief public debacle of ZFS in
OS X - is it in Leopard...yes it's in...no it's not...yes it's in...oh damn,
it's really not - that Apple is building their own clone of ZFS.
I don't know why APple don't just
On Mon, January 16, 2012 11:05, Rich Teer wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012, Toby Thain wrote:
Rumours have long circulated, even before the brief public debacle of
ZFS in OS X - is it in Leopard...yes it's in...no it's not...yes it's
in...oh damn, it's really not - that Apple is building their own
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, David Magda wrote:
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2009-October/033125.html
Perhaps Apple can come to an agreement with Oracle when they couldn't with
Sun.
This seems very unlikely since the future needs of Apple show little
requirement for zfs. Apple
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, David Magda wrote:
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2009-October/033125.html
Perhaps Apple can come to an agreement with Oracle when they couldn't with
Sun.
This seems
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, Freddie Cash wrote:
As an FS for their TimeMachine NAS boxes (Time Capsule, I think),
though, ZFS would be a good fit. Similar to how the Time Slider works
in Sun/Oracle's version of Nautilus/GNOME2. Especially if they expand
the boxes to use 4 drives (2x mirror), and
On 16 Jan 2012, at 16:56, Rich Teer wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, Freddie Cash wrote:
There would likely be a market if someone was to sell pre-packaged zfs for
Apple OS-X at a much higher price than the operating system itself.
10's Complement (?) are planning such a thing, although I
On Mon, January 16, 2012 11:22, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
This seems very unlikely since the future needs of Apple show little
requirement for zfs. Apple only offers one computer model which
provides ECC and a disk drive configuration which is marginally useful
for zfs. This computer model has
On 15/01/12 10:38 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
...
Linux is going with btrfs. MS has their own thing. Oracle continues with
ZFS closed source. Apple needs a filesystem that doesn't suck, but they're
not showing inclinations toward ZFS or anything else that I know of.
Rumours have long
