Re: [Hampshire] ZFS or equivalent available for Linux?

Top Page
Author: Hugo Mills
Date:  
To: lug, Hampshire LUG Discussion List
CC: 
Subject: Re: [Hampshire] ZFS or equivalent available for Linux?

Reply to this message
gpg: failed to create temporary file '/var/lib/lurker/.#lk0x580e7100.hantslug.org.uk.14602': Permission denied
gpg: keyblock resource '/var/lib/lurker/pubring.gpg': Permission denied
gpg: Signature made Mon Jan 14 18:01:10 2008 GMT
gpg: using DSA key 20ACB3BE515C238D
gpg: Can't check signature: No public key
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 05:40:25PM +0000, Damian Lajos Brasher wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 15:24 +0000, Dr Adam J Trickett wrote:
>
> >
> > While ZFS is in BSD and on it's way into OS X it's not likley in Linux
> > in the short term because there are disputes about Suns CDDL licence.
> > I'm not qualified to comment, but it's clear we won't have native
> > ZFS in the stock Linux kernel any time soon.
> >
>
> How is it that the BSD licence model can cope with the Sun CDDL licence?


Because the GPL forbids additional restrictions over and above
those listed in the GPL. BSD, however, basically says "do whatever you
want with this" -- which means that it's pretty much compatible with
any license at all (i.e. BSD-licensed material may be distributed as
source or binary as a part of a larger or derived work licensed under
any other license).

CDDL is based on the Mozilla license (MPL). This has termination
clauses in it about cancelling the license if you sue a developer of
the software for patent infringement. These clauses are not GPLv2
compatible (but resemble similar clauses in the draft of the GPLv3
I've read). Given that it's not feasible to relicense the Linux
kernel, Linux will remain as a GPLv2 project, which is incompatible
with the MPL and CDDL.

Hugo.

-- 
=== Hugo Mills: hugo@... carfax.org.uk | darksatanic.net | lug.org.uk ===
  PGP key: 515C238D from wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net or http://www.carfax.org.uk
        --- A clear conscience.  Where did you get this taste ---        
                         for luxuries,  Bernard?