#Openzfs hardware requirements for android
#Openzfs hardware requirements software
#Openzfs hardware requirements code

Imagine Google including ZFS by default in Android, count the SECONDS before Oracle sues them again.You're probably right, only this would never happen as Google compiles their own kernel for Android and there's no benefit in ZFS for smartphones. Ubuntu, being South Africa based and generating not much revenue in the US would not bring much in. Mitch074 said:Yeah, right - considering Dalvik is a reimplementation of Java (not even a fork, but a clean room re-engineering) and Oracle STILL sued Google for copyright infringement on API CALLS, how long would they wait before they'd sue any and all major company distributing a kernel that includes some of their copyright, nevermind the license? Imagine Google including ZFS by default in Android, count the SECONDS before Oracle sues them again.

It's worth a look!Yeah, right - considering Dalvik is a reimplementation of Java (not even a fork, but a clean room re-engineering) and Oracle STILL sued Google for copyright infringement on API CALLS, how long would they wait before they'd sue any and all major company distributing a kernel that includes some of their copyright, nevermind the license? OpenZFS is the best filesystem available today for those who care about data redundancy/stability and smart caching.

#Openzfs hardware requirements software

CDDL (Common Development and Distribution License) is a free and open-source software license.Ĭanonical (maintainers of Ubuntu) see fit to include CDDL OpenZFS kernel modules with their distro.īasically, Linus didn't know what he was talking about. It was forked from Sun Microsystems' CDDL-licensed project before Sun was acquired by Oracle, and it has been actively developed ever since as its own separate thing. OpenZFS (the only ZFS the Linux community is really talking about) is 100% free and open-source. Unis_torvalds said:There seems to be some confusion in these comments here.

with some of the features we were used to not implementable in Oracle (either for cost and/or technology reasons). Prior to Oracle, we used a composite of custom mainframe and Microsoft Access Forms (we developed in-house) to handle corporate operations. That being said, I like Oracle Outside In Technology and use it routinely for viewing all kinds of odd file types I receive. Granted it had done ok for 10 years (with everyone expected to remember the problem areas so they could avoid them), except for the problem with inadequate handling of large external data which required additional OnBase integration with time-restricted seat licenses in order to bring costs down. We have to scrap large portions of what we have to accommodate changes in the Windows/Java ecosystem it is used in to remove more of the Java forms (as I understand it), which require more additional training for hundreds of people. My issue is with how their technology is wrapped for use in our business environment. We'd probably see the same articles if Bill Gates decided to spend the day responding to questions on forums and made similarly provocative statements while doing so.īigdragon said:Oracle has earned its reputation.I don't have a problem with Oracle one way or the other in that sense (and am certainly not an expert on the subject).

'And if you're talking about OpenZFS, then yes, there's clearly maintenance there, but it has all the questions about what happens if Oracle ever decides - again - that 'copyright' means something different than anybody else thinks it means.'ĭoes this directly affect most Linux users? Not quite, but it does offer a peek inside the mind of the kernel's creator and primary maintainer. Do you think it has a lot of development going on? I don't know. 'If you are talking about ZFS, you're talking about the Oracle version.

#Openzfs hardware requirements code

'I'm talking about small details like the fact that Oracle owns the copyrights but turned things closed-source, so the 'other' ZFS project is a fork of an old code base. When asked why he called ZFS a buzzword, though, Torvalds clarified his thinking in a comment (opens in new tab) posted January 10: (Some also took issue with his claim about the benchmarks, although that appears to be a more nuanced discussion.) The problem was that both Oracle ZFS and OpenZFS have been actively developed for some time.