ZFS will be the new file system in OSX Leopard

[hanzomon4]

Check it out here - Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/06/06/zfs-to-become-default-file-system-in-leopard/)

[Adamant1988]

To answer any queries concerning what ZFS is, please see this link (http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?s=ZFS&gwp=13)

[maniacmusician]

Check it out here - Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/06/06/zfs-to-become-default-file-system-in-leopard/)
yeah, I read about that earlier today as well. When I first read about ZFS a while ago, I was looking forward to Ubuntu possibly adopting it. But I guess we'll be labeled as imitating Apple if we do so now :rolleyes: I despise fanboyism, and no one does it as well as apple fanboys.

But to stay sort of on topic, ZFS looks to be pretty damn good. I would be really thrilled if it was even an option in the ubuntu installer.

[Adamant1988]

yeah, I read about that earlier today as well. When I first read about ZFS a while ago, I was looking forward to Ubuntu possibly adopting it. But I guess we'll be labeled as imitating Apple if we do so now :rolleyes: I despise fanboyism, and no one does it as well as apple fanboys.

But to stay sort of on topic, ZFS looks to be pretty damn good. I would be really thrilled if it was even an option in the ubuntu installer.

You won't see it in Linux anyway, no distribution can adopt it thanks to license incompatibilities. "Thanks GPL, glad you saved us from the awful software!". </sarcasm>

[maniacmusician]

Isn't Sun re-licensing stuff to be GPL-compatible?

[Adamant1988]

Isn't Sun re-licensing stuff to be GPL-compatible?

Some stuff, like java, and maybe solaris, but as it stands the license of this filesystem is not compatible with the GPL. :( There seriously has to be some way to get around the GPL on this one..

[ButteBlues]

Isn't Sun re-licensing stuff to be GPL-compatible?
By God, I can only hope. :(

[hanzomon4]

Yeah sun might do a dual license thing with opensolaris, zfs and such, and some one is working on creating a zfs-fuse thing. The filesystem would exist in userspace side stepping the gpl issue.

[H.E. Pennypacker]

Some stuff, like java, and maybe solaris, but as it stands the license of this filesystem is not compatible with the GPL. :( There seriously has to be some way to get around the GPL on this one..

It is interesting you're blaming the GPL, instead of the CDDL or the Mozilla license. They're the ones actually infringing on people's rights by allowing the inclusion of proprietary software. What is even worse is that the authors of CDDL intended that it been GPL-incompatible. I wonder why, when the GPL provides the freedom needed to ensure freedom.

I'd rather not use ZFS. When they're intentionally making things more difficult, they become laughable. I wouldn't care if they were proprietary all together.

Besides, there are other file systems available, and if I am not mistaken, ZFS is known to be unreliable in some areas (not sure, but I think this may be right).

[maniacmusician]

It is interesting you're blaming the GPL, instead of the CDDL or the Mozilla license. They're the ones actually infringing on people's rights by allowing the inclusion of proprietary software. What is even worse is that the authors of CDDL intended that it been GPL-incompatible. I wonder why, when the GPL provides the freedom needed to ensure freedom.

I'd rather not use ZFS. When they're intentionally making things more difficult, they become laughable. I wouldn't care if they were proprietary all together.

Besides, there are other file systems available, and if I am not mistaken, ZFS is known to be unreliable in some areas (not sure, but I think this may be right).
Honestly, blatant dislike of anything non-GPL really turns me off. It's not like its even closed source...this is an open source implementation and it's a great project.

Of course it's unreliable in some areas; it's still experimental and being improved all the time. Not wanting to use it because it's not GPL'd is illogical. The GPL is not the be-all, end-all guide to software. ZFS is a major improvement over a lot of things in ext, and I think it's a bit foolish that we can't use it because of bad licensing decisions.

[Quillz]

Cool, I read about this earlier, ZFS sounds like a really advanced file system overall. I'll be looking forward to Leopard when it gets released this October.

[mips]

Isn't Sun re-licensing stuff to be GPL-compatible?


I have read somewhere that Sun is considering relicensing ZFS to the GPL.

Anyway, you could always use FreeBSD as they are adopting ZFS.

The sad thing is Apple is probably going to get the credit for this new FS, just watch the media !

[Adamant1988]

]It is interesting you're blaming the GPL[/B], instead of the CDDL or the Mozilla license. They're the ones actually infringing on people's rights by allowing the inclusion of proprietary software. What is even worse is that the authors of CDDL intended that it been GPL-incompatible. I wonder why, when the GPL provides the freedom needed to ensure freedom.

I'd rather not use ZFS. When they're intentionally making things more difficult, they become laughable. I wouldn't care if they were proprietary all together.

Besides, there are other file systems available, and if I am not mistaken, ZFS is known to be unreliable in some areas (not sure, but I think this may be right).

The GPL has a long history of license incompatibilities. This isn't the first time we've missed out on a good thing because of how restrictive the GPL is. Although I don't want to turn this into a licensing discussion, the GPL is akin to be locked into a room all alone "to protect you and your freedoms". I understand why the license exists, but frankly, we lose out on just as much because of the GPL as we gain because of it, if not more.