On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:16 AM John M. Harris Jr <johnmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Monday, June 29, 2020 12:54:02 AM MST Igor Raits wrote: > > On Mon, 2020-06-29 at 00:37 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > > > > On Monday, June 29, 2020 12:32:56 AM MST Samuel Sieb wrote: > > > > > > > On 6/29/20 12:27 AM, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, June 29, 2020 12:18:28 AM MST Samuel Sieb wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6/28/20 11:35 PM, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For the best filesystem ever created, ZFS, I can't say that I > > > > > > > agree > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > your assessment of that value. Having ZFS in Fedora would > > > > > > > throw Fedora > > > > > > > over the top as being the best Linux distro, hands down. I > > > > > > > can count > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > number of times that having root on ZFS has led to me waiting > > > > > > > on kernel > > > > > > > updates over the past three years on one hand, and could > > > > > > > still do so if > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > had half as many fingers! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How many times are you going to keep mentioning ZFS? It's > > > > > > completely > > > > > > off the table, not allowed, never happening. (I consider the > > > > > > chance of > > > > > > Oracle doing something reasonable to be immeasurably small.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See the relevant section of Mark's email. I also don't see how > > > > > it'd > > > > > require Oracle to change anything in order to get OpenZFS into > > > > > Fedora. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You were mentioning ZFS, not OpenZFS. However, it's still the same > > > > problem. OpenZFS is CDDL which won't be accepted. The only way > > > > that > > > > can be changed is if Oracle does something. And as long as OpenZFS > > > > is > > > > an out-of-tree module, it won't be in Fedora. > > > > > > > > > > > > ZFS, in terms of Linux support, is generally OpenZFS. You will note > > > that Mark > > > also simply said "ZFS". Yes, OpenZFS is under CDDL. That's not really > > > a > > > problem. See > > > https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2016/linux-kernel-cddl.html > > > . Ubuntu's solution is wouldn't work for us, and it is a GPL > > > violation > > > (https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2016/feb/25/zfs-and-linux/), but > > > it's also not necessary. The package for OpenZFS could be provided as > > > a kmod > > > package instead, which would *not* be a GPL violation. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand the attitude against this particular out-of-tree > > > module, as > > > it's readily available for every kernel within days of release. The > > > longest > > > lulls have been around holidays, where it took up to 5 days to get > > > support for > > > the latest stable kernel. > > > > > > First of all, Fedora is packaging not only latest stable kernel. Fedora > > is building kernel from git in rawhide almost daily. Secondly, kmods in > > Fedora are not allowed. > > The Times They Are a-Changin'. It wouldn't be the first radical change in > Fedora recently. > > I don't see how building the kernel daily would be an issue here. Yes, it > wouldn't work against some of them once every few months, and then it'd be > fixed within a week. An exception could be made for this particular kmod, and > it'd be well worth it for our users. > It is not acceptable that there is a range of time that people would literally not be able to mount their file systems because the kernel module would not build. Fedora does not allow out of tree kernel modules to be packaged for the distribution. This has been the case since Fedora 7. The only way OpenZFS will become available in Fedora itself is if it gets a FUSE backend[1]. If that happens, I will happily package OpenZFS myself and replace zfs-fuse with it. Contrary to what you might think, I am extremely familiar with OpenZFS and I work with them quite often. The members of the OpenZFS Project know me and I know them. I've worked with them on various things for *years*. That does not change the fact that OpenZFS is a very *special* out of tree kernel module that would put a major crimp in doing a lot of things Fedora does now, like testing and validating snapshots of the Linux kernel as it is being developed. Fedora is a place where we actively work with our upstreams, and we stay close to those projects as part of maintaining software for them. Having kzfs in Fedora would strain that immensely. Unless you're willing to put in the effort to make an OpenZFS FUSE backend, stop bringing it up. It's not going to happen. [1]: https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/8 -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
