Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 11:11:18 +0200 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> To: Wilko Bulte <wb@freebie.xs4all.nl> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org, Jorn Argelo <jorn@wcborstel.com>, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS committed to the FreeBSD base. Message-ID: <461B54B6.60404@fer.hr> In-Reply-To: <20070407141736.GC4058@freebie.xs4all.nl> References: <20070406025700.GB98545@garage.freebsd.pl> <Pine.SOL.4.64.0704052156560.26995@marrakesh> <46177881.3090509@wcborstel.com> <20070407141736.GC4058@freebie.xs4all.nl>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] Wilko Bulte wrote: > On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 12:54:57PM +0200, Jorn Argelo wrote.. >> Rich Teer wrote: >>> This is fantastic news! At the risk of raking over ye olde arguments, >>> as the old saying goes: "Dual licensing? We don't need no stinkeen >>> dual licensing!". :-) >>> >>> >> First of all, thanks a lot for all the hard work of both the FreeBSD >> developers as the ZFS developers. I can't wait to give it a go. >> >> That leads me to one question though: Why is *BSD able to bring it into >> the OS as where Linux has licensing problems with the CDDL? AFAIK Linux >> users can only run it in userland mode and not in kernel mode because of >> the licenses. > > My guess(!) is that they do not want non-GPL-ed code in the standard kernel. Sorry if I'm reiterating what someone maybe already explained, but I don't see it on the lists I read: FreeBSD can include GPL'ed code due to a "technicality" (literally): As long as the code is in a separate kernel module and not in the default shipped GENERIC kernel, it's considered "bundled" and not a part of the kernel. As soon as the user loads a GPLed kernel module, presto-changeo! his kernel "automagically" becomes GPLed. I believe the same holds for CDDL. (I have no idea how to resolve the licensing issues of a kernel with both GPL and CDDL parts :) ). This is less inconvenient than it seems since kernel modules can be (pre)loaded at the same time the kernel loads, and so we can have a ZFS root partition, etc. The problem with DTrace in FreeBSD is twofold: 1. It's much more intertwined with the kernel. 2. Much of its usability comes from it being available in the default shipped kernel - so that users can use it to troubleshoot problems "on the fly" without having to recompile and install a new kernel (involves rebooting). AFAIK (not involved with its development), most of dtrace can reside in a kernel module but some parts need to be in the kernel proper to support this mode of operation, and *this* is where the licensing comes in. Just a few files (AFAIK: mostly header files!) need to be dual-licensed so they can be included in the default kernel build, and the rest can be in the CDDL licensed kernel module. [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGG1S8ldnAQVacBcgRAoNyAJ4mGKdfVa7EBCjxaq+vstSfN2YxoACeMAlM K2zXWIRJqR5gI/wRUzNTASs= =AeqS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?461B54B6.60404>