Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 19:10:40 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> To: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Trond_Endrest=F8l?= <Trond.Endrestol@fagskolen.gjovik.no>, Matthew Macy <mmacy@freebsd.org>, Michael Butler <imb@protected-networks.net>, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: kernel build failure Message-ID: <201808140210.w7E2AeOs039933@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <YTOPR0101MB182026F2D1CBA069F3D758B1DD380@YTOPR0101MB1820.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] > Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > >> On Sun, 12 Aug 2018 14:39-0700, Matthew Macy wrote: > >> > >> > Sorry guys, last time I touched ZFS I tried to push to make it an option to > >> > statically link and was actually told that it wasn't something anyone else > >> > wanted. The issue comes from ZFS not being in NOTES and thus not in LINT. > >> > >> If consensus is that "options ZFS" is no longer valid, then maybe > >> UPDATING should reflect the fact. The consensus here should be that options ZFS is totally valid. > >> I can live with loading zfs.ko and opensolaris.ko at boot time, but I > >> think this is a step backwards. > > > >Please no, I can think of no sound reason that you should be > >forced to use modules. > I thought that ZFS was required to be a module because of the licensing > terms (they didn't want any CDDL code in the core kernel)? I am not asking that we distribute a statically linked kernel, that does create an issue for a GPL kernel, but not for a BSD kernel, I am asking that we continue to be able to statically link ZFS into the kernel as we have been able to for some time. For a very short period of time due to mmacy commit this was broken, he quickly fixed it, so this is a moot issue again. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201808140210.w7E2AeOs039933>