this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2025
899 points (98.1% liked)

linuxmemes

24305 readers
2262 users here now

Hint: :q!

Sister communities:

Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack users for any reason. This includes using blanket terms, like "every user of thing".
  • Don't get baited into back-and-forth insults. We are not animals.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
    • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn, no politics, no trolling or ragebaiting.
    • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, <loves/tolerates/hates> systemd, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
    • 5. 🇬🇧 Language/язык/Sprache
  • This is primarily an English-speaking community. 🇬🇧🇦🇺🇺🇸
  • Comments written in other languages are allowed.
  • The substance of a post should be comprehensible for people who only speak English.
  • Titles and post bodies written in other languages will be allowed, but only as long as the above rule is observed.
    • 6. (NEW!) Regarding public figuresWe all have our opinions, and certain public figures can be divisive. Keep in mind that this is a community for memes and light-hearted fun, not for airing grievances or leveling accusations.
  • Keep discussions polite and free of disparagement.
  • We are never in possession of all of the facts. Defamatory comments will not be tolerated.
  • Discussions that get too heated will be locked and offending comments removed.
    •  

    Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

    Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.

    founded 2 years ago
    MODERATORS
    poopsmith@lemmy.world
    zephyr@lemmy.world
    rtxn@lemmy.world
    899
    Man I miss those classy RedHat ads from the sixties (lemmy.world)
    submitted 2 weeks ago by renzev@lemmy.world to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
    117 comments fedilink hide all child comments
     
    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 65 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

    I wish the licensing would be Linux compatible

    Overall solid but BTRFS has the advantage of being Linux native in the way it works. Right now I wouldn't use btrfs for a critical raid system but it is great for single disks.

    [–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

    Isn’t OpenZFS compatible though?

    [–] Subdivide6857@midwest.social 27 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    I believe the license isn’t, and would be next to impossible the change.

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24269167

    [–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 weeks ago

    Oracle could change it if they wanted to. (They don't care though)

    [–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

    Thanks, TIL. I always assumed the Open version originated on OpenBSD, and therefore licensed under a BSD license. So TrueNAS is technically violating the licenses by using it in their Linux based systems?

    [–] ikidd@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

    Oh Ubuntu even had an edition that defaulted to ZFS. The license violation ship has sailed.

    [–] caffinatedone@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    I don’t think that it’s like a patent where the holder has to defend it; Oracle can decide to go after a license violation if they want to.

    I’d imagine that if a real competitor or someone with deeper pockets shipped it, they’d be hearing from the throngs of lawyers that oracle keeps on staff in short order.

    [–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 13 points 2 weeks ago

    Yeah, the fact that ZFS is in Oracle’s hands is the real crime here. I miss Sun.

    [–] Natanael@infosec.pub 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

    To be pedantic, it's trademarks you have to actively defend. With copyright and patents there's different exceptions, but you can usually sue for at minimum expected license fees (although sometimes you give up the possibility to sue for willful infringement & additional damages if you wait)

    [–] ikidd@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

    I guess my point was that if Canonical did it and nothing came of it, and Canonical isn't poor, probably nothing's going to come of it. Proxmox has been shipping ZFS for years, as well as the BSDs. Not a peep.

    [–] ZkhqrD5o@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

    But we have OpenZFS, which is under CDDL (=LGPL). So it's fine.

    Edit: I was wrong, see comment below.

    [–] ammonium@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

    CDDL is not LGPL and is GPL incompatible

    [–] ZkhqrD5o@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

    How so?

    [–] ammonium@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

    https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#CDDL

    Canonical ships ZFS like Nvidia ships proprietary drivers, which seems to work (legally and technically) but it means the development of ZoL is a bit cumbersome and can never be integrated in the kernel development like other filesystems.

    [–] ZkhqrD5o@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

    Oh dear, I didn't know that. Thanks for the info. I genuinely wish that people would stop using these pushover licenses. I thought it was like the LGPL, but sadly it isn't. At least the base remains free though.

    [–] Natanael@infosec.pub 5 points 2 weeks ago

    It's kinda comparable in terms, but because both licenses have comparable copyleft "no rights may be removed and no terms added" restrictions they conflict and can't be merged.

    CDDL came after GPL, and I'm not convinced by the arguments for why it was used (to make some kind of development with commercial modules easier, but this could've been done with GPL + exceptions)

    That license plus patents (which only are freely licensed to the CDDL implementation specifically) means you can't just rewrite it for Linux either. You'd have to wait for the patents to expire and then do clean room reverse engineering.