Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th Jun 2010 10:15 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linux Employees of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory have ported Sun's/Oracle's ZFS natively to Linux. Linux already had a ZFS port in userspace via FUSE, since license incompatibilities between the CDDL and GPL prevent ZFS from becoming part of the Linux kernel. This project solves the licensing issue by distributing ZFS as a separate kernel module users will have to download and build for themselves.
Thread beginning with comment 428543
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
ZFS for Linux definitive good
by churlish_Helmut on Mon 7th Jun 2010 11:20 UTC
churlish_Helmut
Member since:
2010-04-12

Porting ZFS to Linux is definitve a good effort. Seriously, i think that the ZFS is one of superior items of Solaris and should be ported.

Especially for the fact that OpenSolaris 10.06 ... err. . .i mean 10.07 will be the last release of this OS.

But the way how to get ZFS to Linux is to complicated, especially for the common user, who maybe is not really interested in ZFS. So the license should be changed; So, what about the Linux Kernel under CDDL ? ;-)

Reply Score: 0

flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Some of the great things about Solaris are ZFS, LiveUpgrade, dtrace, zones, SMF and SVM... in my view.

Reply Parent Score: 2

bnolsen Member since:
2006-01-06

have zfs's stbility problems been fixed yet?

Reply Parent Score: 2

renox Member since:
2005-07-06

Porting ZFS to Linux is definitve a good effort.


Bah, until ZFS is made available by Oracle in a GPL-compatible license, I consider the port to be a waste of time: as long as ZFS isn't integrated into the kernel it won't have proper testing and it won't have enough users..
A good example of this is ReiserFS4: not being accepted in the main kernel did reduce its adoption.

Reply Parent Score: 3

ReiserFS4
by s_groening on Mon 7th Jun 2010 18:39 in reply to "RE: ZFS for Linux definitive good"
s_groening Member since:
2005-12-13

... Presumably alongside these 'details' concerning ReiserFS author Hans Reiser's where abouts on Sept. 3, 2006:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/08/its-the-least-p/

Reply Parent Score: 1

vonbrand Member since:
2010-06-07

The ReiserFS 4 fiasko was mostly due to the whole design behind it being a big, unimplementable mess. Sure, for toy cases it did work; but for corner cases it just couldn't.

Reply Parent Score: 0

nalf38 Member since:
2006-09-01

Good idea, but impossible. This was suggested when GPL3 came out. Everyone who ever contributed to the linux kernel would have to give their consent to change the license.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Fri13 Member since:
2009-09-22

The SunOS is not going to have a last version in OpenSolaris. It will definetly continue in Solaris. Oracle has no reasons to kill SunOS, even then if they want to stop OpenSolaris.

And Linux OS can not be relicensed, even if wanted. It is on GLPv2 and stays as such because there is just too many copyright owners for it to get them all accept the licesen change. That is one great thing what is keeping Linux not having GPLv3 even if Linus would wanted the OS have it. GNU need to have their own OS, the HURD to be the only GPLv3 licensed OS if wanted.

Think about it if Linux has over 50 000 copyright owners code in it. To change Linux OS license from GPLv2 to GPLv2 or later / GPLv3 (or later), it would need so massive job to get all 50 000 copyright owners to accept that change. And if there is very critical code what is only accepted to be in GPLv2, the code should be rewritten from scratch without using the old code at all, even as example.

Linux OS stays under GPLv2 and only way to get ZFS as native filesystem to it is to get it as module or use FUSE. The module is not problem because GPLv2 allows Linux OS being expanded with binary only modules. That is something what GPLv3 would not allow. And because Linux is modular, even it is a monolithic operating system, it is possible to do. Just like 3rd parties are doing it, like Nvidia.

Reply Parent Score: 1