On 08/15/2010 09:23 PM, Jason wrote: > > My understanding is anything released under the CDDL by someone that > isn't Oracle (and not contributed under any SCA), would mean Oracle > would have to release any changes to those files as well. They only > get the right to withhold stuff they own the copyright to. > ... > What would be more interesting would be if all the cool stuff was > happening in Illumos, which forced Oracle to follow it (instead of the > other way around) :) > Exactly why I suggested that any new bits added to IllumOS should be GPL'ed. This could probably be done as kernel modules in some cases, so they'd be self contained. This also has the benefit of possibly allowing them to be back ported to Solaris 11 proper, which allows end users to use them, and thus build more exposure for IllumOS. If for whatever reason GPL would be appropriate, then perhaps a derivative of CDDL could be hammered out that gives the rights back to IllumOS in the same way that CDDL does for Oracle? Perhaps this could be called the IllumOS CDDL vs the Oracle CDDL?
Of course the existing Oracle CDDL source files could only be updated and kept as CDDL. Perhaps updates to these could also be distributed as diffs against the original Oracle released files, so as to allow back porting back to Solaris 11 by its end users. (As a suggestion maybe something on the IllumOS web site could auto produce a set of diffs, tar and bzip2'em along with a make file to patch those diffs and compile the patched code.) > Just as a side note, Solaris _8_ had k-splice like functionality (so > really Linux is years behind in this sense), however my understanding > was it was a support nightmare (as now the bits in memory and on disk > might not match, plus the number of possible running configurations > exploded into an extremely large number), etc. All of which tended to > negate any benefits one might get (especially now with beadm + fast > boot support), so it was abandoned. > > I wasn't aware of that, but here's the chance to add it back in. :) Keeping track of what's on disk vs what's on memory could be handled by something that spits out the revision via the /proc file system. Sure, you couldn't compare the kernel binary in memory at all since it would be a bunch of patched code caves, but something could report back the version of the kernel at least. Ok, obviously this isn't a critical, or even important feature. I was just throwing out ideas to raise morale by pointing out what can now be done and all that. K-splice like features would be nice, but there's a lot to do way before that can even be considered. _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
