The whole read-only business sounds like baloney to me. Read-only ZFS implies that the file system would be created elsewhere - and I don't know if there will be continuing compatibility between Solaris/Linux(FUSE)/FreeBSD implementations - so they would presumably support read-only of Solaris' reference implementation. How many people use Solaris on desktop and want to let their Mac read-only their removable ZFS drive? Obviously Apple would not bother with such a feature. I see only 2 logical explanations for nonsense coming from Apple on the topic, and that is:
- It is not going to be ready for Leopard release, so they are pretending that they really meant to make it read-only all along, because they can't stand saying that they failed to get a feature ready. - Jobs is peeved at Sun's boss and his minions now are struggling to reconcile the fact that ZFS is showing up in beta, while wanting to pretend that Sun and ZFS don't exist. On a related topic, does anyone know if there is built-in iSCSI support in latest Leopard beta? I saw some Disk Utility screenshots in the past that had a "Mount iSCSI" menu. On 6/13/07, Graham Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Toby Thain wrote: > What possible use is "read only" ZFS? A user of an OS that _does_ support read+write ZFS might, for example, have one spare USB disk/drive. The user may opt for ZFS for that one disk, gaining the benefits of COW, rollback etc.. The user will be able to read (only) that disk when he connects it to a computer running Mac OS X 10.5. _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
