From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id 6K51B3NZqmHjJgEAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:52:51 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id IAk4A3NZqmEIHQAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 17:52:51 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B11ABB485 for ; Fri, 3 Dec 2021 18:52:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:43904 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mtCjp-00045f-PG for larch@yhetil.org; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 12:52:49 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:48754) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mtCjX-00045R-Lc for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 12:52:31 -0500 Received: from cyberdimension.org ([80.67.179.20]:39968 helo=gnutoo.cyberdimension.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mtCjV-0005pI-8B for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 12:52:31 -0500 Received: from gnutoo.cyberdimension.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cyberdimension.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 2ae8ffa6; Fri, 3 Dec 2021 17:50:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from primarylaptop.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [::1]) by gnutoo.cyberdimension.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 5ddbd0e3; Fri, 3 Dec 2021 17:50:53 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 22:22:28 +0100 From: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli To: raid5atemyhomework Subject: Re: ZFS part of Guix? RFC? Message-ID: <20211130222228.61b1ae8f@primarylaptop.localdomain> In-Reply-To: References: <87eecfrw25.fsf@nckx> <20211122180255.ipauqebmoiyw4bb3@pelzflorian.localdomain> <87bl2aixvx.fsf@gnu.org> <20211124005004.109ef096@primarylaptop.localdomain> <20211124014519.1e227941@primarylaptop.localdomain> <20211124120136.l2dmta332z7c6bmx@pelzflorian.localdomain> <20211124142836.7c7a318d@primarylaptop.localdomain> <878rxd5nlo.fsf@ponder> <20211126162804.726829e3@primarylaptop.localdomain> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.0.0 (GTK+ 3.24.30; i686-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/.5b1IaR13x/G45jl=YSpz/Y"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=80.67.179.20; envelope-from=GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org; helo=gnutoo.cyberdimension.org X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Vagrant Cascadian , "guix-devel@gnu.org" , Domagoj Stolfa Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1638553970; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post; bh=CGQWkvJOOCNIZK8xUHBC9m5AE+5XJTPaNcEknVtoDwY=; b=fN+SNcMYSeKU41GgE0v/FQTWriyrWSMaGwwpCNkqANhrEp6EyizGp8kTjonFYdZevf0jEN iYinC7baySVZTGePaMM8UvMbD30iTVq1NGST8EJ6B3ezZN6EIiIniATr5J0eu8y7XgJx1u mh5bAbqJXq2cpV4lpqxBUQs6JQcZp7huESJsX69T14b4C8YGli25HeFAog7Fien6ydjj8C oxIIKoIy/yeiLw0z2FLIoo8MR2LjcVMuUCPcEyRaGyR7VYmSOEYVYO6LpOVNZAkPPKB1W4 jkXh/id48cI9jYqN87+Qba1JBMXxLRCm1Sh4H8INCa+jfQEJK0Aj+UL0l2/BWw== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1638553970; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=DN0o9oeLhQu11Z89wkaBiDrzzHLiiFJGTmOcdjxsj9W8HTLi9AMZvR+ZdZPkkPIQMcrdiz 23S4OZFteAz63Xqsr3vdiuopNG231+eCT6P4jlTh4ziUKHfmsOtxBEL5x0Qrm+C/V6esCM 373FALGgYlNigOEn++NRtkZHPXS1UWF1XcOGl/2mNwC55n9X0idjjK9naA9NBy478Z+cyE 34NYILv+8+SSp+6ta6gg9RS15MaqwD5c2DfitMtYdW9Z8ZmBAQnzrdDChN1EE3EWmWC0R1 NvgoQB2vsc9on5OyhoAQ2/7hJCBdHCmQOxwnmcKJsSsUumlTHDwTI13B3627uQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -3.03 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Queue-Id: B11ABB485 X-Spam-Score: -3.03 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: KpgKcpiihHa0 --Sig_/.5b1IaR13x/G45jl=YSpz/Y Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 15:22:04 +0000 raid5atemyhomework wrote: > Hello Denis, Hi, > > While thinking about this very weird case of combining GPL and CDDL > > code together, I wonder if the fact that we can't redistribute > > binaries still makes it free software. >=20 > AS I understood from early writings of GNU --- >=20 > "Freedom" here is the freedom to modify how *the hardware you > purchased, which is supposedly your own*, works. >=20 > In principle, "binaries are enough", because you *can* modify > executable binaries, and until Tivoization you could thus modify how > the hardware you purchased and is supposedly owned by you works. > However, early GNU writers (RMS I think?) noted that binaries are > really awful and that you need source code in order to modify how > your hardware work, unless you are willing to sacrifice a ridiculous > portion of your life reverse-engineering executable binaries. In case of binaries, when some people have the source code and you don't, there is also an inequality and power dynamic: people with source code have more power to modify the software than people without. We can see some mention of a somewhat similar power dynamic in the GPLv3 for instance: > But this requirement does not apply if neither you nor any third > party retains the ability to install modified object code on the User > Product (for example, the work has been installed in ROM). And it seems that in the weird case of zfs-on-linux, that power dynamic at least doesn't apply directly as nobody can redistribute binaries unless they are the copyright holder of ZFS and redistribute it all under licenses fully compatible with the GPLv2. Though one could also argue that not everybody is equals when breaking the law (so here when redistributing binaries) but that's probably out of scope here as we only (re)distribute source code here. > Thus, the essential freedom is preserved (users can fork ZFS and > point their personal ZFS package definition at their fork), even if a > legal snag prevents redistribution of binaries. Good point. > I am well aware that *somebody* at Sun Microsystems screwed up by > inventing the CDDL and putting the excellent ZFS under the CDDL and > that is certainly a very cringey decision, but I want my hardware to > work how I want it (i.e. without RAID5 write holes and memory buffer > corruption bugs like in BTRFS "RAID5" mode) and not having ZFS on > Guix is not helping that essential freedom. I also wonder if we have a way to fix that issue for good somehow. It would be neat if somehow the copyright holder of ZFS redistributed zfs-on-linux binaries at some point (for instance by redistributing the Ubuntu kernel). As I understand this wouldn't automatically make that code GPL compliant but we could probably manage to force the copyright holder to re-release the ZFS code under GPL compatible licenses. Rewriting the ZFS code under GPLv2 compatible licenses also looks possible as GRUB has a GPLv3 implementation of ZFS, but it's probably still a lot of work. It would have been a way better idea for Canonical to hire people to do that (like the people that worked to add ZFS to GRUB) rather than trying to circumvent the GPLv2[1][2]. References: ----------- [1]https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2016/feb/25/zfs-and-linux/ [2]https://ubuntu.com/blog/zfs-licensing-and-linux Denis. --Sig_/.5b1IaR13x/G45jl=YSpz/Y Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEeC+d2+Nrp/PU3kkGX138wUF34mMFAmGmlhQACgkQX138wUF3 4mOowg//UrGM4dextzvPc+sUN8+UaZoodDRYcAi35uqPf7qWOii//lZqt0fhsZGa PmREbeE5qLUsKzsAeoAeCaHkHOdRRMXApA5segHYG+6J/oOBilW2VW49XxIo8dH4 9A7psVSnjBWoxmUaXcnpqXAE23N6oH/t2EIlLNBFPuGCQZ03cYkBWydOPPMs0unu Z+70lC1C9wlTD7xPm9h46t+5YNikNtexxooJQrVyv7IlTRnMVMP8/5hPnB3UAxCI gXX2E4yGXiIdXdhB+cMA6B1kwC0SKk1EsEhrkAZFlSKbllG7SVYm6uLhW2lik+vp qWiNKPZFEUEy5zjI3NFAyJzNSNBhv2UcaJm4zCzpXfo61P6loCIdVfEb7DJHGT8z Twkqlf6SQSOBZhjhuNsM07KlYCf8NHUqHvCHgbxCbpZZF0XE7yqPS9Z3+OCG5yoe L59yq40YTirLTdD5t2d9lCgJnc28pBx08JJwz1m8Q72mO3QLmaT+sA5PbSLHZogR 9+MoFYXhYf15OC8qxP86/5SAU/GEsQ+xD0DWvBEOh4Cv3BkefGkIN1DjFbTPuZTl Fw3q/Myjph9gIGDHPWq16VXp70zCLKJWRgQV1PxHJqSPXveDm08Wp7bMaJQiT73W gOZkOSjoJ6AVE9epFRFPXRuRWCxFooiwg0eio7l0+jb2jZjxuAs= =SCz7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/.5b1IaR13x/G45jl=YSpz/Y--