From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A8F97F81 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 14:34:00 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED3A38F8040 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 12:33:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mavmail.mnsu.edu (cas1.Campus.MNSU.EDU [134.29.1.201]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 15O4Mpp4jCV9Hj0u (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 09 Dec 2013 12:33:55 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <52A62932.6000605@mnsu.edu> Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 14:33:54 -0600 From: Jeffrey Hundstad MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [humor] Re: XFS...Windows? References: <000001cef46c$ab687cc0$02397640$@mail.com> <52A5F249.1060505@sandeen.net> In-Reply-To: <52A5F249.1060505@sandeen.net> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com On 12/09/2013 10:39 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 12/8/13, 5:24 PM, Yuji Saeki wrote: >> Congratulations on your file system, it=92s quite nice. I=92ve >> benchmarked it myself, it=92s very impressive. I=92m curious though, is >> there are thought to a Windows driver? If someone ported the most >> current-stable version to Windows (free) under the same license =91GNU >> Lesser General Public License=92 with entire credit to XFS > XFS isn't under the LGPL, it's GPL, as is the rest of the kernel code, > and the license terms should be quite clear. > >> would SGI >> be okay with that? A =91no-warranty implied=92 (etc) kind of protection >> of course. Quite a few devs that I work with enjoy the XFS filesystem >> and we dev in both Linux and Windows. We=92re very interested in making >> this happen with respect to the XFS project. > I'm not a lawyer, but it's not really an issue of opinion - it's a legal > matter. If you can port XFS to Windows while maintaining the terms > of the license agreements on both ends, you're free to do so. > > The technical difficulty of such a task is another matter as well. :) To keep it standards compliant with your new OS, you'd want to change it = just a tiny bit to make it incompatible with the normal XFS, patent that = bit and claim it's an industry standard. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs