----- Original Message -----
From: Josef Sipek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 12:33 pm
Subject: Re: [Unionfs] Unionfs for Solaris

> On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 09:55:58AM +0100, Mark Phalan wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > What would it take to get unionfs working for Solaris.
> > From my understanding of the website FiST already supports Solaris
> > but unionfs itself is GPL'ed. 
> 
> Originally, Unionfs was created using FiST, but since then it has been
> heavily modified - so much so that the task of making it work on 
> Solarismight take more effort than reimplementing it (not 
> necessarily from
> scratch.) Of course, since Unionfs is GPL, you are free to use the
> source according to the rules stated in the license. This is 
> virtually a
> non-issue if you are working on an academic or purely open source
> project.

Unfortunately the GPL will probably be a problem. The GPL is incompatible with 
the CDDL (the open source license that (open) solaris is under). I'm not a 
lawyer but I think that means that I can't use GPL kernel modules with Solaris. 
I guess it also means I can't look at the source if I want to create a CDDL'ed 
kernel module for Solaris.


Thanks for all the help. I'm going to have to think a bit more about this 
before I make an attempt.

-Mark

> 
> The FiST project can be used to generate SunOS compatible stackable
> filesystems, but you can go only so far with the templates - you will
> have to do some hand coding (which will probably be a lot for 
> somethingas complex as unionfs.) The latest supported Solaris 
> version is 8, but
> I vaguely remember hearing something about FiST and Solaris 9.
> 
> > Is the only way to get unionfs working on Solaris to do a re-
> implementation?
> I believe that the best way would be to look at unionfs (for Linux) 
> andlook for the rough edges; I am not familiar with the SunOS VFS
> implementation, but I'd guess that it has the same basic ideas (there
> is a very well defined set of properties each inode/SunOS equivalent
> has, as defined by POSIX.) and therefore taking some "simple" FiST
> generated fan-out (many lower filesystems being accessed by a single
> stackable filesystem) filesystem for Solaris, and turning it to 
> unionfs.
> I am sure you have heard this before, but I have to say this...if 
> you do
> try to implement unionfs, make sure you design you data structures in
> such a way that will make creating the code to do the actual unioning
> simple. Also beware, I suggest you look at unionfs (for Linux) and see
> what kind of things are happening, the worst thing that can happen 
> to a
> design is the realization that it is (near) impossible to implement
> some functionality which is necessary for the program to be of any 
> use.There are some rather interesting behavioral requirements. For 
> example,if you try to truncate a file that's being executed, you 
> should get
> ETXTBSY back as an error, it does make sense that such thing would
> happen, however small things like this make things harder.
> 
> I hope this helps,
> 
> Jeff.
> 

_______________________________________________
unionfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs

Reply via email to