# TrueOS (FreeBSD); ZoL ; tests



## _martin (Jan 5, 2019)

It might be interesting at least to test it: zfsonfreebsd. I'm long waiting for this feature on current FreeBSD ZFS: 

```
# zfs create -o mountpoint=/crypto -o encryption=on -o keyformat=passphrase rpool/crypto
```


----------



## Phishfry (Jan 5, 2019)

Interesting to see that Ix is pushing daily snapshots of this work to TrueOS.


----------



## aht0 (Jan 11, 2019)

BSD & ZoF importance for ZoL project might have just greatly improved. Seems like ZoL is not usable with Linux 5.0 kernel due to internal API changes. Of which Linux kernel top brass are completely unwilling to fix. NIH syndrome at it's best.

https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=154714516832389&w=2



> [I]On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 07:07:52PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > On 2019-01-10 17:32:58 [+0000], Hutter, Tony wrote:
> > > > But since when did out-of-tree modules use __kernel_fpu_begin?  It's an
> > > > x86-only thing, and shouldn't really be used by anyone, right?
> ...


----------



## Beastie7 (Jan 11, 2019)

All that money and support poured into the Linux Foundation and they can't even develop a modern filesystem, or at least have diligence to incorporate one.

Also, their use of language is quite interesting - coming from the top maintainers. Very embarrassing.


----------



## _martin (Jan 11, 2019)

It's sad how one person can do damage just by saying: "NO". I'm curious to see how that thread turns out.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jan 11, 2019)

If people want a proper ZFS implementation - just switch to FreeBSD. it's that simple. Other than support for silicon valley, hipster eye candy trendware - I see no reason for using Linux as a server.


----------



## _martin (Jan 11, 2019)

Beastie7 said:


> if people want a proper ZFS implementation - just switch to FreeBSD.


The thing is that FreeBSD is considering switching to ZoL. This is a nice example how the development would look like.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jan 11, 2019)

_martin said:


> The thing is that FreeBSD is considering switching to ZoL. This is a nice example how the development would look like.



I should've said "experience" instead of "implementation", because it'll still be developed by the same developers. It won't affect the in-kernel ABI/API integration and stability FreeBSD has - and this integration is *shipped* by default. AFAIK, no Linux distribution has this.

The only difference is that the ZoL repository is used for development due to the rate of contributions there. However, I still object this decision for reasons i won't get into again.


----------



## abishai (Jan 11, 2019)

But can we except that Linux folks won't bring linuxisms to OpenZFS ? I fear in future we'll need shims or extensive patching like with drm.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jan 11, 2019)

That was my concern as well. But after watching a recent openZFS meet up. The developers proposed the idea of having a central, 'agnostic' repository with sub-repos containing operating system 'implementations' of openZFS. That way each system can their go their way whilst keeping all new features and bug fixes easily accessible from that 'agnostic' repo.

Now, will the Linux devs keep their feature innovations and bug fixes OS-agnostic? Who knows. Will they keep their word on this approach? Who knows.

IMO, I think they will weasel their way into the innards of the API and control this 'agnostic' repo.


----------

