On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:48 PM, FRLinux <frlinux at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Tim Kersten <tim at io41.com> wrote:
>> Well, I was thinking more along the lines of if they now have the
>> power to re-license it for linux. That is, is there still motivation
>> to continue working on btrfs since it was initially a response to ZFS,
>> and now ZFS is in the bag for Oracle.
>>>> I just found this thread which pretty much covers what I was wondering.
>>http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg02262.html>> Yeah but no, due to licensing, ZFS will not make it to the kernel in
> the current state, one of the reasons it is in user space. btrfs on
> the other hand has been included since kernel 2.6.29.
I guess my initial worry about btrfs should have really been expressed
as "Will _Oracle_ continue it's development?" as there may now might
have been several reasons not too. You're right though. Anyway,
Oracle's Chris Mason and Red Hat's Ric Wheeler set the record
straight:
http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg02270.html
Tim ^,^
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!
