Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 14:53:22 +0100 From: Nils Holland <nils@tisys.org> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.ORG>, "Gary W. Swearingen" <swear@blarg.net>, hiten@uk.FreeBSD.org, "Brandon D. Valentine" <bandix@looksharp.net>, Hiten Pandya <hitmaster2k@yahoo.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, phk@FreeBSD.ORG, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Subject: Re: IBM's intentions with JFS (was: IBM suing (was: RMS Suing was [SUGGESTION] - JFS for FreeBSD)) Message-ID: <20011217145322.A45210@tisys.org> In-Reply-To: <3C1DDB26.62969FFB@mindspring.com>; from tlambert2@mindspring.com on Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 03:46:46AM -0800 References: <3C186381.6AB07090@yahoo.com> <20011214122837.O3448@monorchid.lemis.com> <3C19807D.C441F084@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20011214175450.02da2a90@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20011215232233.00e74cc0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20011216221810.031b6820@localhost> <20011217163427.A2885@monorchid.lemis.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20011217001345.00e26280@localhost> <20011217111835.A43375@tisys.org> <3C1DDB26.62969FFB@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 03:46:46AM -0800, Terry Lambert stood up and spoke: > > > > I thought that you were talking about making FreeBSD support the JFS > > filesystem, and not making FreeBSD *depend* on JFS, so that JFS becomes the > > main and only filesystem available. Consequently, I don't see any problems > > here. > > See above. For it to be useful, it has to be easy to use as the > default FS. The IBM people recognize this as well, as regards JFS > usage in Linux (see the IBM white papers for reference). Of course, this changes quite a lot. As I said, I did not really follow the JFS messages and I thought discussions were going on about making it a supported file system, just as ext2 and FAT are "supported" by the means that slices in this format can be mounted and accessed. However, if talks are about making JFS a choice of default file system at install time (which would require the default and install media kernel to be equipped with JFS code), then this issue is indeed different. Under this light, I understand the previously mentioned dangers that a JFS port would bring us. I don't want to repeat what has already been said, but I would really hate to see FreeBSD under the GPL, as would most of you. Furthermore, I would not be very happy to see legal action being taken against the Project after a possible JFS port has been completed. We do not have any written agreements here, and inspite of what RMS has said now, who knows what he (or IBM or anyone else involved with the JFS code) will say later? In the worst case (and I don't know how likely that would be), these people could require us to virtually make our code theirs (under the GPL). A slight disagreement about licensing issues may mean that this can be brought to a court, which then can make some bad decisions. Alternatively, other legal actions could be taken, like various penalities against the FreeBSD Project. Such penalties surely would be no good - I guess every hacker (and even user) of this project has better things to do than dealing with such things. In the end, whatever gets done, I'd suggest that any unclear implications of any futher move be investigated into beforehand, because else we could face some very unpleasant problems in the end... Greetings Nils -- Nils Holland Ti Systems - FreeBSD in Tiddische, Germany http://www.tisys.org * nils@tisys.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011217145322.A45210>