I''m curious whether there is a version of Linux 2.6 ZFS available? Many thanks. This message posted from opensolaris.org
Hi Yuen, Not to my knowledge. I believe this project is working on it though: http://zfs-on-fuse.blogspot.com/ Best Regards, Jason On 11/6/06, Yuen L. Lee <yuen.lee1 at gmail.com> wrote:> I''m curious whether there is a version of Linux 2.6 ZFS available? > Many thanks. > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >
On 11/6/06, Yuen L. Lee <yuen.lee1 at gmail.com> wrote:> > I''m curious whether there is a version of Linux 2.6 ZFS available? > Many thanks.sorry there is no ZFS in Linux, and given current stands of Linus Torvalds and the current Kernel team there never will be, because Linux is GPLv2 and it is incompatible with ZFS that is released under the CDDL license. The closest possibility to getting ZFS in Linux is through the FUSE project that is porting ZFS to userland that runs inside Linux but is not in the kernel so not limited by the license argument. Of course its probably easier just to run Solaris Express it should have most of your favorite Linux applications allready ported, if not you can use Brandz that allows you to run most Linux apps/excutables in a Zone inside Solaris. James Dickens uadmin.blogspot.com This message posted from opensolaris.org> _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20061107/21aaa1f1/attachment.html>
James Dickens wrote:> > > On 11/6/06, *Yuen L. Lee* <yuen.lee1 at gmail.com > <mailto:yuen.lee1 at gmail.com>> wrote: > > I''m curious whether there is a version of Linux 2.6 ZFS available? > Many thanks. > > > sorry there is no ZFS in Linux, and given current stands of Linus > Torvalds and the current Kernel team there never will be, because > Linux is GPLv2 and it is incompatible with ZFS that is released under > the CDDL license. The closest possibility to getting ZFS in Linux is > through the FUSE project that is porting ZFS to userland that runs > inside Linux but is not in the kernel so not limited by the license > argument.Just in case it isn''t mentioned by someone else, many of the OpenSolaris folks would probably encourage you, Yuen, to bring this up with the Linux kernel folks. Obviously, things like filesystems are very useful to have implementations of on many platforms (i.e. people should own their data, their operating systems shouldn''t). I''m not an expert (nor am I offering legal advice), but my understanding of GPLv2 is the copyright holder can explicitly state exceptions on linking, so they could allow linking with ZFS even though it''s under the CDDL. Linux, when run on say something like a mainframe, already does link with non-GPL modules. So my understanding is it''s not a legal issue or technical issue (other than that pesky porting), but more of a whether-or-not-people-want-it. So if you want it, you should ping the appropriate Linux folks.> > Of course its probably easier just to run Solaris Express it should > have most of your favorite Linux applications allready ported, if not > you can use Brandz that allows you to run most Linux apps/excutables > in a Zone inside Solaris. > > James Dickens > uadmin.blogspot.com <http://uadmin.blogspot.com> > > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org <http://opensolaris.org> > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org <mailto:zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org> > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >-- Matt Ingenthron - Web Infrastructure Solutions Architect Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Client Solutions, Systems Practice http://blogs.sun.com/mingenthron/ email: matt.ingenthron at sun.com Phone: 310-242-6439 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20061106/63f86e34/attachment.html>
There have been extensive discussions on loadable modules and licensing w/r/t the GPLv2 in the linux kernel. nVidia, amongst others, pushed hard to allow for non-GPL-compatible licensed code to be allowed as a Linux kernel module. However, the kernel developers'' consensus seems to have come down against modifying the current kernel GPL license to allow for non-GPL''d loadable modules. For an example of the type of exception required to explicitly allow this type of behavior, check out the GNU Classpath project''s license: http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath/license.html This is similar to the LGPL license. The issue of non-GPL''d loadable modules is still a very active discussion, so I''m sure the last word hasn''t been decided. As pointed out, though, the ZFS code is CDDL, which is incompatible with the GPL. The FUSE project is using a similar approach to nVidia, using a piece of "shim" GPL''d code as a loadable module providing a stable kernel API to call from userland applications, which can carry any license desired. -Erik
Erik Trimble <Erik.Trimble at Sun.COM> wrote:> There have been extensive discussions on loadable modules and licensing > w/r/t the GPLv2 in the linux kernel. nVidia, amongst others, pushed hard > to allow for non-GPL-compatible licensed code to be allowed as a Linux > kernel module. However, the kernel developers'' consensus seems to have > come down against modifying the current kernel GPL license to allow for > non-GPL''d loadable modules.If ever, you would not need to modify the GPL (you are not allowed to do so anyway), but the Linux kernel code would need changes to have more clean interfaces. Depending on the type of a loadable module and on the country where the Author is located (and the local Gopyright law), it looks like non-GPL modules are usually allowed unless you try to incorporate these modules into the Linux _project_ itself. The GPL only requires that all files from a single project ("Work") are under GPL. As I would call ZFS a separate project, it may be under a separate and different license. Note that if the people who like to disallow code under non-GPL lisenses like CDDLd code to be used together with GPLd projects, these people must (if they would be consistent) also demand that GPLd projects may not use LGPLd libraries (as these libs usually cannot be relicensed under GPL). Conclusion: it is a problem that lives in the mind of the Linux kernel people that cannot be fixed unless these people start having a more realistic view on the problem. J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
Matt Ingenthron <Matt.Ingenthron at Sun.COM> wrote:> I''m not an expert (nor am I offering legal advice), but my understanding > of GPLv2 is the copyright holder can explicitly state exceptions on > linking, so they could allow linking with ZFS even though it''s under the > CDDL. Linux, when run on say something like a mainframe, already does > link with non-GPL modules.The GPLv2 does not prevent linking with different projects under different licenses, it just prevents non-GPLv2d code to appear inside a a GPLd project. The latter would only be true if someone claims ZFS is a part ot the Linux Project (GPL speek: "work"). J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
> Erik Trimble <Erik.Trimble at Sun.COM> wrote: > > > There have been extensive discussions on loadable > modules and licensing > > w/r/t the GPLv2 in the linux kernel. nVidia, > amongst others, pushed hard > > to allow for non-GPL-compatible licensed code to be > allowed as a Linux > > kernel module. However, the kernel developers'' > consensus seems to have > > come down against modifying the current kernel GPL > license to allow for > > non-GPL''d loadable modules. > > If ever, you would not need to modify the GPL (you > are not allowed to do so > anyway), but the Linux kernel code would need changes > to have more clean > interfaces.It would be interesting to know whether the Linux kernel folks are willing to accept this approach. I doubt it. It would be easier if we can map all of the Solaris APIs that are used in ZFS with Linux''s. For instance, the VOP_XXX functions, and the synchronization facility, spinlock_t to Solaris kmutex_t etc. Then, we don''t need to worry about whether ZFS is part of Linux kernel project.> > Depending on the type of a loadable module and on the > country where the Author > is located (and the local Gopyright law), it looks > like non-GPL modules are > usually allowed unless you try to incorporate these > modules into the > Linux _project_ itself. > > The GPL only requires that all files from a single > project ("Work") are > under GPL. > > As I would call ZFS a separate project, it may be > under a separate and > different license. > > Note that if the people who like to disallow code > under non-GPL lisenses > like CDDLd code to be used together with GPLd > projects, these people must > (if they would be consistent) also demand that GPLd > projects may not use > LGPLd libraries (as these libs usually cannot be > relicensed under GPL). > > Conclusion: it is a problem that lives in the mind of > the Linux kernel people > that cannot be fixed unless these people start having > a more realistic view > on the problem.I understand the concern for the Linux kernel.. In order to make ZFS to be part of Linux distribution, some of the Linux kernel APIs may need to be changed. It is not an easy task because there is so much code dependent on the APIs.> > J?rg > > -- > EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg > Schilling D-13353 Berlin > js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) > schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: > http://schily.blogspot.com/ > URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ > ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discu > ss >This message posted from opensolaris.org
> <div id="jive-html-wrapper-div"> > > James Dickens wrote: > <blockquote > cite="midcd09bdd10611062233q6dde0c0clc8033761832e9ab2 > mail.gmail.com" > type="cite"><br> > <br> > <div><span class="gmail_quote">On 11/6/06, <b > class="gmail_sendername">Yuen L. Lee</b> <<a > href="mailto:yuen.lee1 at gmail.com">yuen.lee1 at gmail.com > /a>> wrote:</span> > <blockquote class="gmail_quote" > tyle="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); > margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">I''m > curious whether there is a version of Linux 2.6 ZFS > available?<br> > Many thanks.</blockquote> > <div><br> > rry there is no ZFS in Linux, and given current > stands of Linus > Torvalds and the current Kernel team there never will > be, because Linux > is GPLv2 and it is incompatible with ZFS that is > released under the > CDDL license. The closest possibility to getting ZFS > in Linux is > through the FUSE project that is porting ZFS to > userland that runs > inside Linux but is not in the kernel so not limited > by the license > argument. <br> > </div> > </div> > </blockquote> > Just in case it isn''t mentioned by someone else, many > of the > OpenSolaris folks would probably encourage you, Yuen, > to bring this up > with the Linux kernel folks. Obviously, things > like filesystems are > very useful to have implementations of on many > platforms (i.e. people > should own their data, their operating systems > shouldn''t). <br> > <br> > I''m not an expert (nor am I offering legal advice), > but my > understanding of GPLv2 is the copyright holder can > explicitly state > exceptions on linking, so they could allow linking > with ZFS even though > it''s under the CDDL. Linux, when run on say > something like a > mainframe, already does link with non-GPL > modules.<br>Thanks, Matt! I have the same understanding from my previous experience. The difference is my code may not be integrated into the official distribution. I''m interested in porting the ZFS to the Linux platform because I''m attempting to use ZFS in openfiler. I think it would be an interesting and useful project.> <br> > So my understanding is it''s not a legal issue or > technical issue (other > than that pesky porting), but more of a > whether-or-not-people-want-it. > So if you want it, you should ping the appropriate > Linux folks.<br>I agree. Unfortunately, I don''t have any connections with any appropriate Linux folks. This is why I asked in the opensolaris forum to see whether there is any Linux ZFS available. Nonetheless, I''m interested in porting the ZFS to the Linux 2.6 platform. I''m hoping I can share some of the porting workload with others who share this interest. My goal is to use ZFS in my NAS openfiler.> <blockquote > cite="midcd09bdd10611062233q6dde0c0clc8033761832e9ab2 > mail.gmail.com" > type="cite"> > <div> > <div><br> > f course its probably easier just to run Solaris > Express it should > have most of your favorite Linux applications > allready ported, if not > you can use Brandz that allows you to run most Linux > apps/excutables in > a Zone inside Solaris. <br> > <br> > mes Dickens<br> > <a > href="http://uadmin.blogspot.com">uadmin.blogspot.com > /a> <br> > <br> > bsp;</div> > <br> > <blockquote class="gmail_quote" > style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); > margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">This > essage posted from <a > href="http://opensolaris.org">opensolaris.org</a><br> > _______________________________________________<br> > zfs-discuss mailing list<br> > <a > href="mailto:zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org">zfs-discuss@ > opensolaris.org > </a><br> > <a > href="http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs > -discuss">http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo > /zfs-discuss</a><br> > </blockquote> > </div> > <br> > <pre wrap=""> > <hr size="4" width="90%"> > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" > href="mailto:zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org">zfs-discuss@ > opensolaris.org</a> > <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" > href="http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs > -discuss">http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo > /zfs-discuss</a> > </pre> > blockquote> > <br> > <br> > <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- > Matt Ingenthron - Web Infrastructure Solutions > Architect > Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Client Solutions, Systems > Practice > <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" > href="http://blogs.sun.com/mingenthron/">http://blogs. > sun.com/mingenthron/</a> > email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" > href="mailto:matt.ingenthron at sun.com">matt.ingenthron@ > sun.com</a> Phone: 310-242-6439 > > > </pre> > > </div>_______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discu > ssThis message posted from opensolaris.org
Yuen L. Lee wrote:> Thanks, Matt! I have the same understanding from my previous > experience. The difference is my code may not be integrated into > the official distribution. I''m interested in porting the ZFS to the Linux > platform because I''m attempting to use ZFS in openfiler. I think it > would be an interesting and useful project.What about porting openfiler to OpenSolaris ? -- Darren J Moffat
> Yuen L. Lee wrote: > > Thanks, Matt! I have the same understanding from my > previous > > experience. The difference is my code may not be > integrated into > > the official distribution. I''m interested in > porting the ZFS to the Linux > > platform because I''m attempting to use ZFS in > openfiler. I think it > > would be an interesting and useful project. > > What about porting openfiler to OpenSolaris ?Good question! In my understanding, openfiler is just a standalone version of the Linux based embedded system with File-level protocols support, such as NFS, CIFS, iSCSI (target/iniator), FTP and HTTP. OpenSolaris supports all of them. But It is a complete, general purpose distribution. If it is made to run as an appliance, I''m sure I don''t need to port ZFS to the openfiler (Linux) platform. opensolaris could be a nice NAS filer. I posted my question on "How to build a NAS box" asking for instructions on how to build a Solaris NAS box. It looks like everyone is busy. I haven''t got any response yet. By any chance, do you have any doc on this subject? Thanks. Yuen> > -- > Darren J Moffat > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discu > ss >This message posted from opensolaris.org
Yuen L. Lee wrote:>> Yuen L. Lee wrote: >>> Thanks, Matt! I have the same understanding from my >> previous >>> experience. The difference is my code may not be >> integrated into >>> the official distribution. I''m interested in >> porting the ZFS to the Linux >>> platform because I''m attempting to use ZFS in >> openfiler. I think it >>> would be an interesting and useful project. >> What about porting openfiler to OpenSolaris ? > > Good question! In my understanding, openfiler is > just a standalone version of the Linux based embedded > system with File-level protocols support, such as > NFS, CIFS, iSCSI (target/iniator), FTP and HTTP. > OpenSolaris supports all of them.I think the fact that openfiler is Linux isn''t the relevant and interesting bit. The interesting bit is the web based GUI to configure all those things. The underlying technologies it is using are all available in OpenSolaris distros as well. A good place to start from might be Nexenta since that would give you a Linux like environment to work in and might make it easier to get the openfiler GUI up and running.> But It is a > complete, general purpose distribution. If it is > made to run as an appliance, I''m sure I don''t need > to port ZFS to the openfiler (Linux) platform. > opensolaris could be a nice NAS filer. I posted > my question on "How to build a NAS box" asking for > instructions on how to build a Solaris NAS box. > It looks like everyone is busy. I haven''t got any > response yet. By any chance, do you have any > doc on this subject? Thanks.It might also be that where you posted it the correct people aren''t hanging out if you haven''t already try: The Appliances and NFS communities. http://opensolaris.org/os/community/appliances/ http://opensolaris.org/os/community/nfs -- Darren J Moffat
> > Yuen L. Lee wrote: > opensolaris could be a nice NAS filer. I posted > my question on "How to build a NAS box" asking for > instructions on how to build a Solaris NAS box. > It looks like everyone is busy. I haven''t got any > response yet. By any chance, do you have anyHi Yuen May I suggest that a better question would have been "How to build a minimal Nevada distribution ?". I''m sure it would have gotten more responses as it is both - a more general, and a more relevent question. Apart from that unasked advice, If my memory serves right the Belenix folks (Moinak and gang) were discussing a similar thing in a thread sometime back... chasing them might be a good idea ;-) I found some articles on net on how to build minimal image of solaris with networking. Packages relating to storage (zfs, iSCSI etc) can be added to it later. The minimal system with required components, sure, is heavy - about 200MB... but shouldn''t be an issue for a *NAS* box. I googled "Minimal solaris configuration" and found several articles. Hope that helps - Akhilesh This message posted from opensolaris.org
On Tue, 2006-11-07 at 10:30 -0800, Akhilesh Mritunjai wrote:> > > Yuen L. Lee wrote: > > opensolaris could be a nice NAS filer. I posted > > my question on "How to build a NAS box" asking for > > instructions on how to build a Solaris NAS box. > > It looks like everyone is busy. I haven''t got any > > response yet. By any chance, do you have any > > Hi Yuen > > May I suggest that a better question would have been "How to build a minimal Nevada distribution ?". I''m sure it would have gotten more responses as it is both - a more general, and a more relevent question. > > Apart from that unasked advice, If my memory serves right the Belenix folks (Moinak and gang) were discussing a similar thing in a thread sometime back... chasing them might be a good idea ;-) > > I found some articles on net on how to build minimal image of solaris with networking. Packages relating to storage (zfs, iSCSI etc) can be added to it later. The minimal system with required components, sure, is heavy - about 200MB... but shouldn''t be an issue for a *NAS* box. I googled "Minimal solaris configuration" and found several articles.Alternative way would be to simply use NexentaOS InstallCD and select "Minimal Profile" during installation. -- Erast