Ten Reasons To *NOT* Use ZFS:

[Rahul Sundaram]

On Sat, 2006-06-24 at 02:56 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 16:15 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-06-24 at 02:33 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > 
> > > As it is now, what is a verifiable claim clearly says that Linux is not
> > > under any sort of modified GPL license.
> > 
> > I'm a little confused then.  With the kernel memory model that
> > encompasses user space and the FSF claim that everything that
> > runs in the same memory space is derived, doesn't that make it
> > impossible to run any non-GPL'd code without a license violation?
> 
> I have seen FSF making any such claims based on memory space especially
> regarding the kernel. 

Ahem. I have *not* seen FSF make such claims. 

> Again what is derived code in software is not
> clearly defined by copyright laws in many regions and there isnt
> sufficient case history to determine one way or the other in a general
> fashion. In many such cases, the intend of the copyright holders matter
> more than the claims of the people who wrote the license (in this case
> the FSF) and that is where Linus note might actually matter.
> 
> The kernel people have never claimed that user space is derivative of
> the Linux kernel. That would be stupid. 
> 
> 
> Rahul
>