Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2015 13:59:00 -0400 From: Quartz <quartz@sneakertech.com> To: freebsd-fs <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: A question about ZFS built-in SMB Message-ID: <559AC1E4.6050906@sneakertech.com> In-Reply-To: <CA%2B7WWSc%2BgzMDysc345Qpnd6HtsUKcwrndsAjiXEri%2BABssPGDg@mail.gmail.com> References: <5599496C.6010702@sneakertech.com> <20150705210306.GA1048@in-addr.com> <559A08AF.9050809@sneakertech.com> <CAOjFWZ4ktnPGeqKgv-SLtpfEajnYnOQ7rHZr6JYD6jYw6r835A@mail.gmail.com> <559A14DB.3080905@sneakertech.com> <559A87FE.70309@kateley.com> <559AB32A.7070702@sneakertech.com> <CA%2B7WWSc%2BgzMDysc345Qpnd6HtsUKcwrndsAjiXEri%2BABssPGDg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> Oh ok. I was under the impression that Linux ZFS was basically a hack/port >> of the FreeBSD version due to licensing issues, and the FreeBSD version was >> itself a port of the illumos version. >> > > http://zfsonlinux.org/faq.html#WhatAboutTheLicensingIssue > > There is no real licensing issue since ZFS can be compiled into a > loadable kernel module(s) on Linux (just as it is used in FreeBSD > anyway) and that avoids the clash between the two mutually > incompatible licenses. Did this change recently? Last time I looked was a few years ago and ZFS on Linux was still largely an awkward hack because what they had to do to work around the licensing issue. I heavily investigated the Debian/kFreeBSD project before just going with mainline FreeBSD.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?559AC1E4.6050906>