3 ms·
I didn't realize NetBSD was playing the catch up game with what other distros have had for some time, like ZFS. That's disappointing.
by leetNightshade 12y ago
I didn't realize NetBSD was playing the catch up game with what other distros have had for some time, like ZFS. That's disappointing.
- feld 12y agoWhat's a "distro" have to do with BSD? The only BSD that has ZFS is FreeBSD.
- leetNightshade 12y agoWell it seems I don't use 'distro' properly. I guess it only concerns Linux, but I personally don't see any reason it can't be used for OS flavors in general. Hell, the website distrowatch includes BSD and everything in between. Is there a similar phrase for BSD variants? And ZFS is on a lot more than just FreeBSD, even if it's not official. ZFS started on OpenSolaris, not on FreeBSD. OS X has a port. Then FreeBSD got it's port. Linux has a stable port. And there are NAS OS's shipping with it like FreeNAS, TrueNAS, and a device called ReadyDATA by Netgear that has it. I was mostly surprised at this: "The good stuff that probably won’t make it to NetBSD 7: Stable ZFS." So you're telling me ZFS isn't considered stable on NetBSD? It seems to be that it's pretty stable on quite a few other platforms, some mentioned above.
- feld 11y agoLinux distros share a kernel -- the Linux kernel. Maybe different versions, maybe a few different patches here and there -- but unquestionably the same kernel. In BSD world they're completely separate OSes. Their kernels have evolved differently. They may have similar ancestry. You can't just copy and paste code from one to another and expect it to work.