zfs discuss - Jul 2006 - Most stupid Ten reasons not to use ZFS

Hello zfs-discuss,

  http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2006-June/msg03623.html

  Are they so afraid they have to write such bullshit!?

-- 
Best regards,
 Robert                          mailto:rmilkowski at task.gda.pl
                                     http://milek.blogspot.com

Robert Milkowski wrote:
> Hello zfs-discuss,
> 
>   http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2006-June/msg03623.html
> 
>   Are they so afraid they have to write such bullshit!?
The most annoying part to me is this bit:

"2 . ZFS does not support the necessary extended attributes and ACLs to
enable the implementation of SELinux security. Instead Sun prefers the
deployment of its own security software "Trusted Solaris", which is
not FOSS and runs at a cost of "$995 per seat for the Standard Edition
Desktop System to $79,495 for the Certified Edition Data Center
Server.""

While that is true for Trusted Solaris 8 it is most certainly NOT true 
for Solaris Trusted Extensions.  The only part of Trusted Extensions 
that is not currently under an OSI approved license is the modifications 
to CDE because we can''t produce that.

Whats more ZFS DOES have ACLs and DOES have extended attributes.

SELinux is the new guy on the block, Trusted Solaris is older than all 
of Linux!

The rest is just uninformed licensing related fud.

More fool them for not getting it!

-- 
Darren J Moffat

Darren J Moffat stated:
< Robert Milkowski wrote:
< >Hello zfs-discuss,
< >
< >  http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2006-June/msg03623.html
< >
< >  Are they so afraid they have to write such bullshit!?
< 
< The most annoying part to me is this bit:
< 
< "2 . ZFS does not support the necessary extended attributes and ACLs
to
< enable the implementation of SELinux security. Instead Sun prefers the
< deployment of its own security software "Trusted Solaris", which
is
< not FOSS and runs at a cost of "$995 per seat for the Standard Edition
< Desktop System to $79,495 for the Certified Edition Data Center
< Server.""
< 
< While that is true for Trusted Solaris 8 it is most certainly NOT true 
< for Solaris Trusted Extensions.  The only part of Trusted Extensions 
< that is not currently under an OSI approved license is the modifications 
< to CDE because we can''t produce that.
< 
< Whats more ZFS DOES have ACLs and DOES have extended attributes.
< 
< SELinux is the new guy on the block, Trusted Solaris is older than all 
< of Linux!
< 
< The rest is just uninformed licensing related fud.
< 
< More fool them for not getting it!

 Some do, see this followup:
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2006-June/msg04266.html
  This poster even corrects himself on the Trusted Solaris front with another
  follow up at:
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2006-June/msg04497.html

< 
< -- 
< Darren J Moffat
< _______________________________________________
< zfs-discuss mailing list
< zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org
< http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

-- 
Sean.
.

Darren J Moffat wrote:
> ....
>
> The rest is just uninformed licensing related fud.
>
> More fool them for not getting it!

Indeed.  There was a followup to that email that went
through and debunked that posting along exactly those
lines and to which the OP did not respond.

Darren

Sean McGrath - Sun Microsystems Ireland wrote:
>  Some do, see this followup:
> http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2006-June/msg04266.html
>   This poster even corrects himself on the Trusted Solaris front with
another
>   follow up at:
> http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2006-June/msg04497.html
And does so by pointing to *my* blog even, cool!

-- 
Darren J Moffat