Originally posted by jacob
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Ubuntu Developers Seem To Be Really Pursuing ZFS Root Partition Support On The Desktop
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by hybridchemistry View PostI'd like to think I'm somewhat educated about ZFS, but I'm still kind of puzzled as to why folks want to use it as a root file system, particularly with a single drive (as I assume most Desktop installs would use). Do the ZFS permissions, quotas, etc become all that useful to Desktop installs?
- Likes 3
Leave a comment:
-
Well it's interesting news for me. ZFS on Linux version 0.8 is looking to be pretty nice. I've lost faith in Btrfs, and Red Hat's answer to it is a big joke. Bcachefs does look hopeful, but how many more years until it becomes a trustworthy filesystem with features that compare to ZFS or Btrfs?
ZFS gives some nice features. Obviously the snapshots are great, but the send and receive features are very nice as well. Or you could make backups from servers that aren't running ZFS by using rsync with the "--inplace" switch, then take a snapshot of it for ultimate space savings. Really cool stuff.
- Likes 2
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by DoMiNeLa10 View PostSounds like a call to boycott Canonical (and possibly sue them due to license breaches) to me. I hope they back down before they actually deface GNU GPL, because they're large enough to become a scapegoat. People posting publicly should back off and think again before publicly considering whether breaking GPL is a good idea (it's not).
I hope Linux developers will wage a war against ZFS, as it will enforce the GNU GPL, and with enough pressure it might cause Oracle to re-license their file system under acceptable terms (not that I care about the file system).
It's not breaking the GPL anymore than your Nvidia driver. The difference is ZFS is actually open source.. Nvidia isn't. (you've no problem with that tho right?) And Oracle does not control the license to ZoL or OpenZFS.
I'm glad Linux is moving forward and getting a terrific file system out to every day users. Good job! Data integrity for everyone! .. and it's about time.Last edited by k1e0x; 12 February 2019, 09:30 PM.
- Likes 8
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by DoMiNeLa10 View PostSounds like a call to boycott Canonical (and possibly sue them due to license breaches) to me. I hope they back down before they actually deface GNU GPL, because they're large enough to become a scapegoat. People posting publicly should back off and think again before publicly considering whether breaking GPL is a good idea (it's not).
I hope Linux developers will wage a war against ZFS, as it will enforce the GNU GPL, and with enough pressure it might cause Oracle to re-license their file system under acceptable terms (not that I care about the file system).
ZFS won't be re-licensed anytime soon.
- Likes 3
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by DoMiNeLa10 View PostSounds like a call to boycott Canonical (and possibly sue them due to license breaches) to me. I hope they back down before they actually deface GNU GPL, because they're large enough to become a scapegoat. People posting publicly should back off and think again before publicly considering whether breaking GPL is a good idea (it's not).
I hope Linux developers will wage a war against ZFS, as it will enforce the GNU GPL, and with enough pressure it might cause Oracle to re-license their file system under acceptable terms (not that I care about the file system).
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
Guest repliedSounds like a call to boycott Canonical (and possibly sue them due to license breaches) to me. I hope they back down before they actually deface GNU GPL, because they're large enough to become a scapegoat. People posting publicly should back off and think again before publicly considering whether breaking GPL is a good idea (it's not).
I hope Linux developers will wage a war against ZFS, as it will enforce the GNU GPL, and with enough pressure it might cause Oracle to re-license their file system under acceptable terms (not that I care about the file system).
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostYou have to create restricted datasets by specifically disallowing ZFS features at pool creation for Grub to be able to read it.
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostI'd like to be able to use SELinux user and group contexts on pools and datasets in general, not just on the files underneath them.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by mskarbek View Post
There is no need to rework Grub (and that would mean massive rewrite of parts of the ZFS code base into Grub if you would like to boot from encrypted root dataset for example forced by CDDL) because you don't need Grub at all, UEFI solved that issue.
What better integration with SELinux you have in mind?
I'd like to be able to use SELinux user and group contexts on pools and datasets in general, not just on the files underneath them. Like if "zpool list" was ran as a regular user, only that user's dataset, like tank/home/$USERNAME, would show up and not tank/system/snapshots, tank/system/usr, or tank2onAnotherDiskForGrub/boot. Not everyone needs to know exact pool names, locations, etc. I'm not actually sure if that would be handled by SELinux, ZFS, or a little bit of both...hell, it might be possible now, been a while since I've looked into the two since I don't use SELinux on a regular basis nor am I usually bothered by security concerns...it's just something I've been thinking about since a discussion about multiseat Linux boxes the other day.
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostHopefully that means they're going to do things like getting Grub to support all the 0.8 ZFS features, create or use a decent backup solution with an easy-mode GUI like Suse does with BTRFS, better selinux integration, and things along those lines.
It would also be interesting if they release kernels/maintain patches that revert the recent GPL export changes.
What better integration with SELinux you have in mind?
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: