Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canonical Talks Up Ubuntu 16.04 LTS With ZFS, LXD

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Luke
    replied
    Originally posted by chrisb View Post

    This. Canonical is taking a bit of a risk - in the best case they get to ship ZFS, but in the worst case it will be a PR disaster if they lose against Oracle and have to withdraw ZFS after tens of thousands of customers have already started using it. Once it's out there being used in the wild there will be no viable automated upgrade route back to ext4 (or whatever), and customer systems will be unbootable if Canonical is forced to push kernel upgrades that don't support ZFS.
    That has a counter. The license issue concerns DISTRIBUTION, so a user could simply roll back to a previous kernel version. Thus, if you want to use ZFS with Ubuntu you need to save the older kernel packages or be prepared to build the kernel yourself with ZFS support compiled back in. BTW, if Ubuntu loses a 3ed party or possibly Ubuntu themselves depending on the court ruling could certainly offer the module source code and simply forget about distributing binaries. A DKMS module would be another option.

    Leave a comment:


  • finalzone
    replied
    Originally posted by Stellarwind View Post
    GPL insists that every "derived work" that comes together with GPL, must be under GPL as well. Canonical does not claim ZFS is under GPL, so it doesn't violate CDDL requirement and Oracle has no grounds to sue. Canonical also claims that ZFS is not a derived work of the kernel, therefore they can keep CDDL license, but some people disagree.
    Meaning the CDDL license was deliberately made incompatible GPL (that came before CDDL exists) by SUN engineers for redistribution. Oracle being the owner of that license did say nothing to clarify the matter. That is why commercial distributions avoid including OpenZFS inside the media or chose shipping it as source.

    Leave a comment:


  • BreezeDM
    replied
    If Oracle makes a move they will wait until it is wide spread. Even if it is clearly not a violation, I wouldn't put it past the company that claimed copyright on a range check function to sue.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stellarwind
    replied
    There is no CDDL violation in including zfs in Ununtu side by side with Linux kernel as a module. Problem is in possible GPL violation. CDDL basically saying use it where you want, but it must remain under CDDL. GPL insists that every "derived work" that comes together with GPL, must be under GPL as well. Canonical does not claim ZFS is under GPL, so it doesn't violate CDDL requirement and Oracle has no grounds to sue. Canonical also claims that ZFS is not a derived work of the kernel, therefore they can keep CDDL license, but some people disagree.

    p.s. "Rampant layering violations" is actually a good case for ZFS being alien to Linux and therefore not a derived work.
    Last edited by Stellarwind; 20 April 2016, 08:33 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • finalzone
    replied
    Originally posted by DanL View Post
    I was told that there's absolutely no issue with CDDL violation (i.e. Oracle has no legal case). OpenZFS was legally forked before Oracle closed off their Solaris/ZFS code. The only issue is whether distributing ZFS the way Ubuntu has violates the GPL.
    The devil in the details is the fork i.e. OpenZFS still inherits the CDDL license. The silence from Oracle is definitely alarming as if the company is waiting from Canonical making the move before striking.

    Leave a comment:


  • bug77
    replied
    Originally posted by tegs View Post

    Because he wrote all versions of the GPL. Idiot.
    I was about to write that there's indeed an idiot in this this discussion. But I'm hoping you're just young/clueless.

    Leave a comment:


  • k1l_
    replied
    Originally posted by tegs View Post
    I just don't see the point in shipping ZFS with the ISOs for the desktop and the different flavors. I could only see this being valuable in shipping with their Ubuntu Server ISOs as that is where this is going to be used anyways. Why don't they just keep ZFS as a separate package or not ship it with the ISO and then bring it in via an apt upgrade of a meta package.

    Ever heard of this things called containers? http://blog.dustinkirkland.com/2016/...untu-1604.html

    Leave a comment:


  • tegs
    replied
    I just don't see the point in shipping ZFS with the ISOs for the desktop and the different flavors. I could only see this being valuable in shipping with their Ubuntu Server ISOs as that is where this is going to be used anyways. Why don't they just keep ZFS as a separate package or not ship it with the ISO and then bring it in via an apt upgrade of a meta package.

    Leave a comment:


  • vladpetric
    replied
    Originally posted by Mystro256 View Post
    And we all know how much Oracle likes to suing people for products they didn't even create *cough*java*cough*.
    They bought Sun in its entirety, and that includes all the Java IP that Sun owned.

    No, I'm not a big fan of copyrightable APIs, but strictly from an ownership perspective they are entitled to sue.

    Leave a comment:


  • nils_
    replied
    Originally posted by chrisb View Post

    This. Canonical is taking a bit of a risk - in the best case they get to ship ZFS, but in the worst case it will be a PR disaster if they lose against Oracle and have to withdraw ZFS after tens of thousands of customers have already started using it. Once it's out there being used in the wild there will be no viable automated upgrade route back to ext4 (or whatever), and customer systems will be unbootable if Canonical is forced to push kernel upgrades that don't support ZFS.
    The solution would then be to switch back to the PPA provided by zfsonlinux like most people who use ZFS on Linux currently do.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X