> CDDL isn't a BSD Licence, it's the licence that's used by what was Sun
> Microsystems and is now Oracle.
>
sorry my mistake for thinking zfs was bsd (even after you said it was
cddl)! i was confusing it with the fact that you can use zfs via
freebsd). thx for the correction.
i looked it up and the key point for me is that
"The Free Software Foundation considers it a free software license that
is incompatible with the GNU General Public License (GPL)."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Development_and_Distribution_License
> The BSD Licence and GNU can co-exists quite
> well and have for a very long time.
>
i'd forgotten this largely i think due to some of the hostility
demonstrated on the excellent freebsd mailist towards gpl (a few years
ago).
i guess this is also why you can actually have debian/freebsd then.
furthermore, we bridge the incompatibilities perhaps:
zfs --> cddl||bsd --> bsd||gpl --> debian(gpl)/freebsd(bsd)
i'm not up on the licensing protocols so i'm just guessing here.
No worries, couldn't hurt to read up on CDDL[1], *BSD[2] Licences and GNU/GPL[3]. As for your general Filesystem needs, XFS or XFS-LVM is probably the smart way to go.
You mentioned something about doing this on USB (solid-state?) storage? You might want to also consider reading up on USB's general policy about write few, read many. In a nutshell, most USB devices don't like to be written to many many times (such as a busy *primary* FS). They have a limited shelf-life of writes )wear leveling) before they go bad (I have an OCZ ATV rubber thumb drive that has suffered this.) This is why they tell you defragmenting SSD's is a *VERY* bad idea, you significantly reduce the write ability of the device.[4][5][6]
--
> A: Yes.
> >Q: Are you sure?
> >>A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
> >>>Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?