Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Example of this happening with ZFS on Linux, right now: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190111180617.2k5uundov6hf4m7h...


From Greg Kroah-Hartman at https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190110182413.GA6932@kroah.com

> My tolerance for ZFS is pretty non-existant. Sun explicitly did not want their code to work on Linux, so why would we do extra work to get their code to work properly?

Ouch. It hurts to see Greg still holding onto that old grudge.

Wariness around commercial Unix vendors may've made some sense in 2005 when ZFS was released, but not only does it not make sense 14 years later, but the company the community viewed with suspicion has since entirely ceased to exist.

I spent a long time trying to finagle btrfs because it was the blessed, in-tree copy-on-write filesystem. It was a nightmare. It doesn't take long for ZFS to prove itself the massively superior solution.

Canonical's adoption of ZFS is a welcome relief, along with SFLC guidance that there is no incompatibility with the CDDL and GPL.

We need to bring the rest of the crew along and stop reinventing the wheel here. Linux will be so much better off once it accepts ZFS.


The biggest wtf here is that only some exports are GPL only. One has to wonder if there aren't any ulterior motives for this cherry picking.


Seriously that's crazy.

Its why I've never been a fan of the GPL. Its restrictive instead of permissive.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: