On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 05:16:39PM +0200, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
> On May 22, 2013, at 3:52 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
> > Linux has plenty of fine filesystems to choose from already, so this is
> > not a must-have.
>
> Ohhh, ouch! But I'm not going to bite... :)
>
> > Also, there are questions as to whether it would be legal.
>
> Legal as in CDDL clashes with GPL you mean?
>
> I've heard that to. It would be nice to hear, once and for all
> if this is the case or not...
That's not how legal systems work, though.
> >> The kernel team would endorse the use of dkms as a way for out-of-tree
> >> module maintainers to get their modules auto-built.
> >
> > Doesn't work for d-i, of course.
>
> So what you're saying, in short, is that we can forget about it?
No, I'm just pointing out the obvious: installation support for ZoL is
going to be a case where the general recommendation for OOT module
packaging doesn't work.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking.
- Albert Camus
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130522184448.gg4...@decadent.org.uk
