On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 08:24:13PM +0100, Mark Phalan wrote: > > > ----- 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.
Well, my guess is, you could "cheat" and do something similar to what binary driver vendors like NVidia. They do: binary driver <--> simple GPL layer <--> kernel When you build their driver, you compile the GPL layer only. Now, assuming the CDDL doesn't prohibit say BSD code you should be fine :) You'd get: GPL code <--> BSD layer <--> CDDL code Hacky? Yes. Legal? Just as the binary driver scenario above. Jeff. _______________________________________________ unionfs mailing list [email protected] http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
