[CentOS] Native ZFS on Linux

Tue Jun 2 04:36:58 UTC 2015
Fernando Cassia <fcassia at gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 12:02 PM, Chris Adams <linux at cmadams.net> wrote:

> All that matters for CentOS is:
> 1: Red Hat doesn't ship ZFS because of Red Hat's lawyers' interpretation
>    of GPL+CDDL
> 2: Arguing about it here will not change #1
> 3: CentOS ships a clone of Red Hat Enterprise Linux and so won't have
>    things that Red Hat's lawyers don't approve (see #2)
> Please let it go.  I think everybody here knows your opinion.


I for one will go with Btrfs. This is where the action is at, ATM, and more
and more companies are investing in BTRFS and going with it: SUSE, Fujitsu,
Docker, Facebook, Oracle...

Btrfs 1.0, with finalized on-disk format, was originally slated for a
late-2008 release,[12] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Btrfs#cite_note-12>
and was finally accepted into the Linux kernel mainline
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel_mainline> in 2009.[13]
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Btrfs#cite_note-13> Several Linux
distributions <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_distribution> began
offering Btrfs as an experimental choice of root file system
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root_file_system> during installation.[14]
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Btrfs#cite_note-16> In summer 2012, several
Linux distributions moved Btrfs from experimental to production or
supported status.[17] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Btrfs#cite_note-17>[18]

The ZFS Zealots (ZZ or Z-square) brigade act like kids on a temper trantum
because they preferred toy was left out of the playground. Please get down
your crying and yelling, there's people trying to work here (with btrfs).


During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary
Durante épocas de Engaño Universal, decir la verdad se convierte en un Acto
- George Orwell