From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-150219-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0128F1381F3
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 22:49:44 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2D4DAE0D68;
Fri, 30 Aug 2013 22:49:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-we0-f177.google.com (mail-we0-f177.google.com [74.125.82.177])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA8C7E0D57
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 22:49:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-we0-f177.google.com with SMTP id q55so2081844wes.36
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 15:49:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to
:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id;
bh=TJ2u8KfbiqUChytzHMsLR0WelsyeY7My7k/IF8yB62s=;
b=Nrl1VgmzIdRET1e47VxLZfFQFduu9p1FYk5/jNPajPrPbUmfjM0ORgeUFgJDZUO3pX
A4zlxRfVxbXpUYwHVhUF+PaN1yYuuUKUop6L/tNLVIV1Y0sqhga3zzM0h/uiaZ5zGebE
GtCj5ioORkYEVasU0DY+TOTwp7uXiaYwY8GVhMGDRSJP7sufja5Nfvc2SEymASrgv5oF
91s8vaKOVHQx3Fp4Uba7/xbaG9biHpZf2tbT/qUGC1dENumR6POxvoxRR4/09ZrdQHIv
OCmBhauuoq2q7Z2w1YCR1dL2GGeHHqmEFgowQhwHPsJi+La5/qiIwTSD2NDZqwWU/ASq
Li1Q==
X-Received: by 10.180.12.243 with SMTP id b19mr4267268wic.18.1377902972337;
Fri, 30 Aug 2013 15:49:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dell_xps.localnet (230.3.169.217.in-addr.arpa. [217.169.3.230])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id dr11sm775754wid.3.1969.12.31.16.00.00
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Fri, 30 Aug 2013 15:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mick <michaelkintzios@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: Integrated ZFS for Gentoo - WAS Re: [gentoo-user] Optional /usr merge in Gentoo
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 21:16:27 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.10.7-gentoo; KDE/4.10.5; x86_64; ; )
References: <439435.46090.bm@smtp104.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <5220AD8D.5080306@gmail.com> <5220AFD3.6060402@libertytrek.org>
In-Reply-To: <5220AFD3.6060402@libertytrek.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
boundary="nextPart5628295.d1y82dDbIX";
protocol="application/pgp-signature";
micalg=pgp-sha1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201308302116.50428.michaelkintzios@gmail.com>
X-Archives-Salt: 0cb0d8ec-501a-4b1b-92b7-ef581e1fffca
X-Archives-Hash: ebfe16a110d79100136f1e8834859d4a
--nextPart5628295.d1y82dDbIX
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Friday 30 Aug 2013 15:44:35 Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2013-08-30 10:34 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 30/08/2013 16:29, Tanstaafl wrote:
> >> Why would there be a problem if someone decided to create a 3rd party
> >> overlay *not* part of the official gentoo portage tree that contained
> >> *only* the zfs stuff, and when this overlay was installed combined with
> >> a zfs keyword for the kernel, portage would then pull in the required
> >> files, and automagically build a kernel with an up to date version of
> >> zfs properly and fully integrated?
> >>=20
> >> Would this not work, *and* have no problems with licensing?
> >=20
> > there is no problem with licensing in that case.
> > The ebuild could even go in the portage tree, as Gentoo is not
> > redistributing sources when it publishes an ebuild.
>=20
> Thanks Alan! Just the answer I wanted.
>=20
> Ok, so... how hard would this be then? What would the chances be that
> this could actually happen? I'll happily go open a bug for it if you
> think the work would be minimal...
>=20
> It seems to me that I can't be the only one who would like to see this
> happen?
Nope! I will vote for you. ;-)
=2D-=20
Regards,
Mick
--nextPart5628295.d1y82dDbIX
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux)
iQEcBAABAgAGBQJSIP2yAAoJELAdA+zwE4YeDdkIAMiRXw/8vT2oj6NQznbQbOqi
LLjbkd2+Kr0CmsQchW/kmi5NUpbumbYo6RWyr48joIN25gomdwNlys8DeiQKJz1J
mIT3wm/EAecg+ML40yyMbU+pAgtNfSn+k16pr1eNxeelPK6D4nv0oW4bn1gGrdRu
VkkpYnf9NVK3nkzch7K4nkrMPP2ZsD0jVEuHK3yeVRSY0Lhi+xWebOKteSlRy8eW
pwmOW47Z2koSV4yx4O5gLbrC3ZiF1C/o19M9w7JN5e9bbIyWT9WH/1Gmhh4JkBLc
3ZzAZdNG73emhq9A3K/U9SvRH/6hPTiRqL7Gl/hNQp/l0bu0soTxBRKpQ9yivlM=
=aILk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nextPart5628295.d1y82dDbIX--