From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Feb 14 10:17:08 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA83516A419;
	Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:17:08 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from csaba@beastie.creo.hu)
Received: from beastie.creo.hu (www.creo.hu [217.113.62.14])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3361813C469;
	Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:17:07 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from csaba@beastie.creo.hu)
Received: from beastie.creo.hu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by beastie.creo.hu (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m1EAFBrj015449
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:15:11 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from csaba@beastie.creo.hu)
Received: (from csaba@localhost)
	by beastie.creo.hu (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id m1EAFBnV015448;
	Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:15:11 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from csaba)
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:15:11 +0100
From: Csaba Henk <csaba-ml@creo.hu>
To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@des.no>
Message-ID: <20080214101511.GE49155@beastie.creo.hu>
References: <3bbf2fe10802061700p253e68b8s704deb3e5e4ad086@mail.gmail.com>
	<70e8236f0802070321n9097d3fy1b39f637b3c2a06@mail.gmail.com>
	<slrnfqrp6g.i6j.csaba-ml@beastie.creo.hu>
	<867ihdc34c.fsf@ds4.des.no>
	<20080212190207.GB49155@beastie.creo.hu>
	<86d4r2540f.fsf@ds4.des.no>
	<20080213165923.GD49155@beastie.creo.hu>
	<86zlu493ep.fsf@ds4.des.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <86zlu493ep.fsf@ds4.des.no>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09)
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2
	(beastie.creo.hu [127.0.0.1]);
	Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:15:12 +0100 (CET)
Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove NTFS kernel support
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:17:09 -0000

On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 06:23:10PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> My implicit assumption was that it would be much harder to maintain a
> FUSE library in ports, since it is so tightly bound to the FUSE kernel
> module.

So then, just to clean up more implicit principles: also you mean that
LGPL'd code can't go to the base system unless absolutely necessary? If
yes, why so? FreeBSD has embraced recently a big chunk of CDDL'd code
without making much fuss about licensing, and for practical purposes, I
don't see much difference between CDDL and LGPL (altough the latter is
worded undisputedly sickly :)).

Regarding your assumption: I think it's not true. The only thing that
the lib and the module have in common is the header fuse_kernel.h which
defines the data structures and constants used in the kernel/userspace
protocol. This protocol is versioned and the kernel and the daemon
negotiate the highest proto version supported by both parties and shall
communicate according to that.

Csaba