On Dec 21, 2007 7:51 PM, John Forte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry for the late response. I think I'm unclear as to why we need a
> project created for investigative purposes. I would think that if we're
> trying to determine feasibility, that can be done outside the scope of a
> formal project. The word investigate sort of implies that the project
> might not proceed dependent upon the outcome of some investigation and
> maybe that's truly the intent of the proposal. Is it possible to clarify
> what needs to be investigated and can/should anything be done up front
> prior to project instantiation to better ensure success? For me, it's
> not entirely clear what I'm voting on.
John,
You right, I should have clarify that a little bit more. The purpose of the
investigation is to determine whether the compatibility with Linux
device-mapper can be achieved. The device mapper by itself is quite
useful facility in my opinion. The immediate value, however, is in providing
enough functionality to be able to interoperate with Linux.
What can be done upfront ? That's a good question. I am planning to
prototype the dm facility and use this prototype to see whether I can
get it to access Linux-created devices. Another thing is to check whether
original Linux libdevmapper can be used as is. The library is licensed
under LGPL, so the licensing shouldn't be as issue. There portability of
the code, on the other hand is questionable. So another thing to determine
would be whether to create a native library implementing same API, or
to invest into porting it (lib) over to Solaris.
Does that clear thing up for you ?
--
Regards,
Cyril
_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
