similar to: Sidebar re ABI stability (was Segmentation fault / core dump)

Hi all, What is the current preferred method for backing up ZFS data pools, preferably using free ($0.00) software, and assuming that access to individual files (a la ufsbackup/ufsrestore) is required? TIA, -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OGB member CEO, My Online Home Inventory URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich http://www.linkedin.com/in/richteer

Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > On Apr 27, 2015, at 4:38 AM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > > This is the SVr4 Bourne Shell, so you need to take into account what has been > > added with Svr4: > > Is there any difference between your osh and the Heirloom Bourne Shell? > >

<m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: > Ah. I don't remember if I was using csh, or ksh, and didn't realize about > bash. I *think* I vaguely remember that sh seemed to be more capable than > I remembered. If you like to check what the Bourne Shell did support in the late 1980s, I recommend you to fetch recent Schily tools from:

It wouldn''t be proper to start my first post here without congratulations and thanks to the ZFS team for such an impressive piece of work. Anyway, on to my query. I''ve been trying out ZFS, with a particular focus in reducing latency in a specific application. This application has a fair amount of random writing going on in the background (which, of course, ZFS will make

Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Joerg Schilling > <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > >>> > >> Yes, if you mean what is described here as 'the original 4-clause' > >> license, or BSD-old: > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses > > > > Do you like to

Copying a CD with k3b is no problem, except I want to include on my copy the cbbd data (from freedb.org). I've configured k3b's cddb section according to instructions at <http://www.freedb.org/en/faq.3.html#15> and read every article google could find about "k3b cddb freedb.org config", but still k3b can't manage it. Grip handles getting the cddb data just fine.

Here''s some exciting news! Chris Emura, the Filesystem Development Manager within Apple''s CoreOS organization is interested in porting ZFS to OS X. For more information, please e-mail him directly at cemura at apple.com. Speaking for the zfs team (at Sun), this is great news and we fully support the effort. my powerbook hungers for ZFS, eric This message posted from

Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Joerg Schilling > <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > > > >> > "as a whole" means generally BUT allowing for exceptions. > >> > >> OK, great. That clears it up then. > > > > Maybe this helps: > > >

Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Joerg Schilling > <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > > > I would be interested to understand why Heirloom seems to so well known and my > > portability attempts seem to be widely unknown. > > > > Not sure why it matters with a standalone

Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Joerg Schilling > <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > > > >> > Do you like to discuss things or do you like to throw smoke grenades? > >> > >> The only thing I'd like to discuss is your reason for not adding a > >> dual

Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Always Learning <centos at u64.u22.net> wrote: > > > >> Yes, in english, 'work as a whole' does mean complete. And the normal > >> interpretation is that it covers everything linked into the same > >> process at runtime unless there is an alternate

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > > There was no court case, but VERITAS published a modifed version of gtar where > additional code was added by binary only libraries from VERITAS. The FSF did > never try to discuss this is public even though everybody did

Why does ZFS report such small directory sizes? For example, take a maildir directory with ten entries: total 2385 drwx------ 8 17121 vmail 10 Jun 8 23:50 . drwx--x--x 14 root root 14 May 12 2006 .. drwx------ 5 17121 vmail 5 May 25 18:16 .Trash drwx------ 5 17121 staff 6 Jun 9 00:01 .testing -rw------- 1 17121 staff 0 Jun

Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer at gmail.com> wrote: > On 04/27/2015 12:28 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Up to now, nobody could explain me how a mixture of GPL and BSD can be legal as > > this would require (when following the GPL) to relicense the BSD code under GPL > > in order to make the whole be under GPL. > > The GPL doesn't require that you relicense

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > If you combine ZFS and Linux, you create a permitted "collective work" and the > GPL cannot extend it's rules to the CDDLd separate and independend work ZFS of > course. Which countries' copyright laws would permit that explicitly even when some of the

When I use copy/paste text into a window running vi, if there is a single line starting with '#', in the pasted content, it adds a # to all subsequent lines and indents each an additional level. Is there some way to eliminate this bizarre behavior, preferably globally and permanently so I don't have to repeat some change for every machine/user where I might log in? -- Les

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:32:45AM -0400, Scott Robbins wrote: > Wasn't Solaris, which for awhile at least, was probably the most popular > Unix, using ksh by default? Solaris /bin/sh was a real real dumb version of the bourne shell. Solaris included /bin/ksh as part of the core distribution (ksh88 was a part of the SVr4 specification) and so many scripts were written with #!/bin/ksh at

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > > >>> 4. CDDL annoys a lot of people. >> >> The CDDL does not annoy people, this is just a fairy tale from some OSS enemies. > > The following irritates me, I am a ?people,? and I am not an OSS enemy: > > http://zfsonlinux.org/faq.html#WhatAboutTheLicensingIssue It is

Once upon a time, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> said: > Note that it is without doubt that ZFS was not derived from the Linux kernel > and thus cannot be a derived work. All that matters for CentOS is: 1: Red Hat doesn't ship ZFS because of Red Hat's lawyers' interpretation of GPL+CDDL 2: Arguing about it here will not change #1 3: CentOS

> > > OK, plese note that I am not willing to tolerate anti-oss claims and will > continue to correct similar false claims. If you don't like those > discussions > at all, you should try to avoid false claims and the need for corrections. > If I were RedHat, including a non GPL filesystem into my operating system would make me sweat a bit. Intel were facing a similar