Oracle Might Be Canning Solaris

[lkundrak]

they are not going ti relicence anything. They might include ZFS support in their Linux distribution, making it interesting for someone for the first time. (just because it would be the only enterprise distribution supporting it)

That's not how it works. The license conditions that apply to Linux don't allow this. Either they distribute ZFS under compatible license and everyone can distribute it too, or they don't do it at all.

[Guest]

Finally. Few years ago someone was saying slowlaris is a dead cow and Ellison is a liar. Thanks oracle for admiting this. This bloated crap is dead since long time.

[Slartifartblast]

at least they continue to maintain virtualbox

Shhhh, Larry doesn't know about that.

[bug77]

Pretty much. That's what we do at work - development machines run CentOS, while testing environments (and the clients) run RedHat with a support contract.

I suspect that from the RedHat perspective, it's a useful branding split. The actual product is more or less identical, but it's clearer to distinguish "free CentOS vs commercial RedHat" than it is to distinguish "RedHat with or without a support contract".

Afaik, RH makes money from support and some commercial tools (monitoring & administration) only available in RHEL. So yes, you wouldn't need to pay for those tools for each developer PC.
At the same time, having the same runtime available, ensures the code is run under the same conditions from dev to QA to production, which is always good for quality. So yes, unlike other companies that make operating systems, RH can let us have the cake and eat it at the same time

[Passso]

I doubt anyone would miss them.

I managed a few ones used for data storage and transfer, they were rock stable and for this I miss them a bit.
(Linux distros were not that stable in this era, now Solaris is useless)

[cynic]

That's not how it works. The license conditions that apply to Linux don't allow this. Either they distribute ZFS under compatible license and everyone can distribute it too, or they don't do it at all.

They could distribuite it as a kernel module, and that would fully comply with the kernel license

[pal666]

trolololololol!

here is a little education for you from zfs developer https://lwn.net/Articles/342892/

[pal666]

Full disclosure; I worked a little on ZFS's code base.

you could also get some education from my previous post

[pal666]

They could distribuite it as a kernel module, and that would fully comply with the kernel license

they couldn't if it is derived from linux. are you sure you could successfully argue in court that linux filesystem module is not derived from linux?

[DanL]

here is a little education for you from zfs developer https://lwn.net/Articles/342892/

It's a 7 year old article. It says nothing about the current state of btrfs and how it compares to ZFS in a production environment like a data center. Please bring relevant information the next time you want to hand out "education."