From maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com Tue May 6 15:01:47 2008 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m46M1kPN008795 for ; Tue, 6 May 2008 15:01:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m46M1kPf045125; Tue, 6 May 2008 16:01:46 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0K0G00103VUY8A00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 06 May 2008 15:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic.eng.sun.com ([129.146.56.36]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0K0G0015YVUY1W00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 06 May 2008 15:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jurassic.eng.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m46M1g0v601510 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 06 May 2008 15:01:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from maybee@localhost) by jurassic.eng.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/Submit) id m46M1grt601506; Tue, 06 May 2008 15:01:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 15:01:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Maybee Subject: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review] To: PSARC-ext@sun.com Cc: zfs-boot-team@sun.com Message-id: <200805062201.m46M1grt601506@jurassic.eng.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 Status: RO Content-Length: 1195 The ZFS Boot project team wishes to record the following information: Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.66 04/17/08 SMI This information is Copyright 2008 Sun Microsystems 1. Introduction 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: Author: Lori Alt 1.3 Date of This Document: 06 May, 2008 4. Technical Description A. SUMMARY This case seeks to change the binding of PSARC/2006/370 (ZFS Boot Support) from minor binding to patch binding. B. PROBLEM The selection of "minor" for the binding of this case was an error in the original case filing. ZFS Boot Support was always intended for integration into a Solaris update release. It doesn't establish any interface changes that would prevent it from being implemented as a patch. It has been designed from the outset as a feature that could be back-ported to an update release and released as a patch. C. PROPOSED SOLUTION Change the binding from "minor" to "patch". 6. Resources and Schedule 6.4. Steering Committee requested information 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: ON 6.5. ARC review type: Automatic 6.6. ARC Exposure: open From don.cragun@sun.com Tue May 6 16:41:30 2008 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m46NfT9E011580 for ; Tue, 6 May 2008 16:41:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m46NfEn6005545; Wed, 7 May 2008 00:41:27 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0K0H00H010GZ3E00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 06 May 2008 17:41:23 -0600 (MDT) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0K0H00M7M0GYSJD0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 06 May 2008 17:41:22 -0600 (MDT) Received: from spartan.eng.sun.com (spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.226.64]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m46NfLI0059622; Tue, 06 May 2008 16:41:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spartan (spartan [129.146.226.64]) by spartan.eng.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7) with SMTP id m46NXqec003670; Tue, 06 May 2008 16:33:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 16:33:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Cragun Subject: Re: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review] To: PSARC-ext@sun.com, maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com Cc: zfs-boot-team@sun.com, tim.sparlin@sun.com, fred.zlotnick@sun.com, tim.cramer@sun.com Reply-to: Don Cragun Message-id: <200805062333.m46NXqec003670@spartan.eng.sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.6.2 SunOS 5.10 sun4u sparc Content-type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-MD5: C4J4G3oNjTBnJE06QfpM/g== X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 Status: RO Content-Length: 2687 >Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 15:01:42 -0700 (PDT) >From: Mark Maybee > >The ZFS Boot project team wishes to record the following information: > >Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.66 04/17/08 SMI >This information is Copyright 2008 Sun Microsystems >1. Introduction > 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: > ZFS Boot Support Binding Change > 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: > Author: Lori Alt > 1.3 Date of This Document: > 06 May, 2008 >4. Technical Description > >A. SUMMARY > >This case seeks to change the binding of PSARC/2006/370 (ZFS Boot >Support) from minor binding to patch binding. > >B. PROBLEM > >The selection of "minor" for the binding of this case was >an error in the original case filing. ZFS Boot Support was >always intended for integration into a Solaris update release. >It doesn't establish any interface changes that would prevent >it from being implemented as a patch. It has been designed >from the outset as a feature that could be back-ported to >an update release and released as a patch. > >C. PROPOSED SOLUTION > >Change the binding from "minor" to "patch". Given that ZFS does not yet conform to POSIX and UNIX standards requirements (even though the zfs(1M) man page says that ZFS provides a "standard POSIX file system"), that Solaris 8, 9, and 10 and their updates are covered by several UNIX branding licenses, and that (according to PSARC 2006/370) it is not possible to go back to a UFS root after upgrading to a ZFS root, I STRONGLY object to allowing a patch binding for this case unless a TCR is attached saying that this feature can't be patched into earlier releases until all POSIX and UNIX standards conformance bugs have been fixed. I'm sorry that this information is not available outside of Sun, but for those inside Sun, the heading "for ZFS:" on web page http://stds-test.sfbay/resources/brand_status.html can be used as a guide to known ZFS standards conformance bugs. The fact that ZFS was granted a conformance waiver to be integrated into the ON-NV gate before it passed the test suites (with a promise that the bugs would be fixed before Nevada is released) can't be used as a waiver for branded products that are already shipping. Sun has certified to The Open Group and many of our enterprise customers that Solaris 8 and its updates, Solaris 9 and its updates, and Solaris 10 and its updates (current and future) do and will continue to conform to UNIX branding requirements. - Don > >6. Resources and Schedule > 6.4. Steering Committee requested information > 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: > ON > 6.5. ARC review type: Automatic > 6.6. ARC Exposure: open From unixconsole@yahoo.com Tue May 6 17:32:41 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m470We81013473 for ; Tue, 6 May 2008 17:32:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m470WcRn019589 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 7 May 2008 08:32:39 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0K0H00H052UEZ600@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 06 May 2008 17:32:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.98.34]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0K0H001BP2UE1W70@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 06 May 2008 17:32:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay17i.sun.com (ip127.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.127]) by brmea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id m470TrSl009367 for ; Wed, 07 May 2008 00:32:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp14es.sun.com ([160.41.209.24] [160.41.209.24]) by relay17i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-150471 for PSARC-ext@sun.com; Wed, 07 May 2008 00:32:37 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay16i.sun.com (relay16i.sun.com [129.179.4.126]) by mmp14es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-195810 for PSARC-ext@sun.com; Wed, 07 May 2008 00:32:37 +0000 (Z) Received: from web30808.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.200.151] [68.142.200.151]) by relay1i.sun.com id BT-MMP-3237355 for PSARC-ext@sun.com; Wed, 07 May 2008 00:32:37 +0000 (Z) Received: (qmail 29512 invoked by uid 60001); Wed, 07 May 2008 00:32:35 +0000 Received: from [71.52.80.224] by web30808.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 06 May 2008 17:32:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 17:32:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Octave Orgeron Subject: Re: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review] To: Don Cragun , PSARC-ext@sun.com, maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com Cc: tim.sparlin@sun.com, zfs-boot-team@sun.com, tim.cramer@sun.com, fred.zlotnick@sun.com Message-id: <595338.28985.qm@web30808.mail.mud.yahoo.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/975.23 YahooMailWebService/0.7.185 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; b=2APmUhigpe7KXIf4S+p+mUT61beauFFFIuJHZJx0F0dysQEFbRb347tHlG349qdanz60yCSRGr55fGMK8iBku5t3DvM4nKQ9lLNo3nc2sbdIcOhKYAUB7Wcka5ECA6t0iZPIQUEd8INVX4QZ1WArlAUFV6CqxBorc53JsOUvRSU=; X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-YMail-OSG: mgPGQuEVM1mjefPvEX29NuCLpyeTlOIsogq6oo1IX2OoEhPKQ2sBMJP1Z_iEHnkWR9APq1usHGagzCZXPY2Quae5ilKiwvJaQaF.9PSzWCy6XjgqP8QikocfqQ-- X-Antispam: No, score=-2.6/5.0, scanned in 0.406sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ Status: RO Content-Length: 3913 Hi, I'm surprised that ZFS is not POSIX or UNIX compliant. Considering that many commercial customers and ISVs depend on compliance to the standards, I would think it's important to remediate the issues to prevent a possible show-stoppers. How much effort is required to fix these issues? *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Octave J. Orgeron Solaris Systems Engineer http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/sysadmin/ http://unixconsole.blogspot.com unixconsole@yahoo.com *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* ----- Original Message ---- From: Don Cragun To: PSARC-ext@sun.com; maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com Cc: tim.sparlin@sun.com; zfs-boot-team@sun.com; tim.cramer@sun.com; fred.zlotnick@sun.com Sent: Tuesday, May 6, 2008 6:33:52 PM Subject: Re: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review] >Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 15:01:42 -0700 (PDT) >From: Mark Maybee > >The ZFS Boot project team wishes to record the following information: > >Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.66 04/17/08 SMI >This information is Copyright 2008 Sun Microsystems >1. Introduction > 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: > ZFS Boot Support Binding Change > 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: > Author: Lori Alt > 1.3 Date of This Document: > 06 May, 2008 >4. Technical Description > >A. SUMMARY > >This case seeks to change the binding of PSARC/2006/370 (ZFS Boot >Support) from minor binding to patch binding. > >B. PROBLEM > >The selection of "minor" for the binding of this case was >an error in the original case filing. ZFS Boot Support was >always intended for integration into a Solaris update release. >It doesn't establish any interface changes that would prevent >it from being implemented as a patch. It has been designed >from the outset as a feature that could be back-ported to >an update release and released as a patch. > >C. PROPOSED SOLUTION > >Change the binding from "minor" to "patch". Given that ZFS does not yet conform to POSIX and UNIX standards requirements (even though the zfs(1M) man page says that ZFS provides a "standard POSIX file system"), that Solaris 8, 9, and 10 and their updates are covered by several UNIX branding licenses, and that (according to PSARC 2006/370) it is not possible to go back to a UFS root after upgrading to a ZFS root, I STRONGLY object to allowing a patch binding for this case unless a TCR is attached saying that this feature can't be patched into earlier releases until all POSIX and UNIX standards conformance bugs have been fixed. I'm sorry that this information is not available outside of Sun, but for those inside Sun, the heading "for ZFS:" on web page http://stds-test.sfbay/resources/brand_status.html can be used as a guide to known ZFS standards conformance bugs. The fact that ZFS was granted a conformance waiver to be integrated into the ON-NV gate before it passed the test suites (with a promise that the bugs would be fixed before Nevada is released) can't be used as a waiver for branded products that are already shipping. Sun has certified to The Open Group and many of our enterprise customers that Solaris 8 and its updates, Solaris 9 and its updates, and Solaris 10 and its updates (current and future) do and will continue to conform to UNIX branding requirements. - Don > >6. Resources and Schedule > 6.4. Steering Committee requested information > 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: > ON > 6.5. ARC review type: Automatic > 6.6. ARC Exposure: open _______________________________________________ opensolaris-arc mailing list opensolaris-arc@opensolaris.org ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ From Mark.Carlson@sun.com Tue May 6 19:39:44 2008 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m472dij2015755 for ; Tue, 6 May 2008 19:39:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m472ddqd007642; Tue, 6 May 2008 19:39:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0K0H006018Q7P700@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 06 May 2008 20:39:43 -0600 (MDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0K0H00L6W8Q6W130@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 06 May 2008 20:39:42 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-amer-10.sun.com ([192.18.109.80]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id m472dglN002187; Wed, 07 May 2008 02:39:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0K0H00K018PDVF00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Mark.Carlson@Sun.COM); Tue, 06 May 2008 20:39:42 -0600 (MDT) Received: from Macintosh-39.local ([208.54.15.117]) by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0K0H008KH8PYB140@mail-amer.sun.com>; Tue, 06 May 2008 20:39:39 -0600 (MDT) Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 20:39:34 -0600 From: "Mark A. Carlson" Subject: Re: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review] In-reply-to: <595338.28985.qm@web30808.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Sender: Mark.Carlson@sun.com To: Octave Orgeron , Don Cragun Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com, Tim.Sparlin@sun.com, Fred.Zlotnick@sun.com, zfs-boot-team@sun.com, tim.cramer@sun.com Message-id: <48211666.5020700@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_DigIoXnJu/l1LDCgtw3zPA)" X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <595338.28985.qm@web30808.mail.mud.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421) Status: RO Content-Length: 10721 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_DigIoXnJu/l1LDCgtw3zPA) Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Why is this particular back ported feature being made an example of? Isn't most of ZFS already back ported? -- mark Octave Orgeron wrote: > Hi, > > I'm surprised that ZFS is not POSIX or UNIX compliant. Considering that many commercial customers and ISVs depend on compliance to the standards, I would think it's important to remediate the issues to prevent a possible show-stoppers. How much effort is required to fix these issues? > > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* > Octave J. Orgeron > Solaris Systems Engineer > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/sysadmin/ > http://unixconsole.blogspot.com > unixconsole@yahoo.com > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Don Cragun > To: PSARC-ext@sun.com; maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com > Cc: tim.sparlin@sun.com; zfs-boot-team@sun.com; tim.cramer@sun.com; fred.zlotnick@sun.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 6, 2008 6:33:52 PM > Subject: Re: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review] > > >> Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 15:01:42 -0700 (PDT) >> From: Mark Maybee >> >> The ZFS Boot project team wishes to record the following information: >> >> Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.66 04/17/08 SMI >> This information is Copyright 2008 Sun Microsystems >> 1. Introduction >> 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: >> ZFS Boot Support Binding Change >> 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: >> Author: Lori Alt >> 1.3 Date of This Document: >> 06 May, 2008 >> 4. Technical Description >> >> A. SUMMARY >> >> This case seeks to change the binding of PSARC/2006/370 (ZFS Boot >> Support) from minor binding to patch binding. >> >> B. PROBLEM >> >> The selection of "minor" for the binding of this case was >> an error in the original case filing. ZFS Boot Support was >> always intended for integration into a Solaris update release. >> It doesn't establish any interface changes that would prevent >> it from being implemented as a patch. It has been designed >> > >from the outset as a feature that could be back-ported to > >> an update release and released as a patch. >> >> C. PROPOSED SOLUTION >> >> Change the binding from "minor" to "patch". >> > > Given that ZFS does not yet conform to POSIX and UNIX standards > requirements (even though the zfs(1M) man page says that ZFS provides a > "standard POSIX file system"), that Solaris 8, 9, and 10 and their > updates are covered by several UNIX branding licenses, and that > (according to PSARC 2006/370) it is not possible to go back to a UFS > root after upgrading to a ZFS root, I STRONGLY object to allowing a > patch binding for this case unless a TCR is attached saying that this > feature can't be patched into earlier releases until all POSIX and UNIX > standards conformance bugs have been fixed. > > I'm sorry that this information is not available outside of Sun, but > for those inside Sun, the heading "for ZFS:" on web page > http://stds-test.sfbay/resources/brand_status.html can be used as a > guide to known ZFS standards conformance bugs. > > The fact that ZFS was granted a conformance waiver to be integrated > into the ON-NV gate before it passed the test suites (with a promise > that the bugs would be fixed before Nevada is released) can't be used > as a waiver for branded products that are already shipping. Sun has > certified to The Open Group and many of our enterprise customers that > Solaris 8 and its updates, Solaris 9 and its updates, and Solaris 10 > and its updates (current and future) do and will continue to conform to > UNIX branding requirements. > > - Don > > >> 6. Resources and Schedule >> 6.4. Steering Committee requested information >> 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: >> ON >> 6.5. ARC review type: Automatic >> 6.6. ARC Exposure: open >> > > _______________________________________________ > opensolaris-arc mailing list > opensolaris-arc@opensolaris.org > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Be a better friend, newshound, and > know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ > _______________________________________________ > opensolaris-arc mailing list > opensolaris-arc@opensolaris.org > --Boundary_(ID_DigIoXnJu/l1LDCgtw3zPA) Content-type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Why is this particular back ported feature being made an
example of? Isn't most of ZFS already back ported?

-- mark

Octave Orgeron wrote: 
Hi,

I'm surprised that ZFS is not POSIX or UNIX compliant. Considering that many commercial customers and ISVs depend on compliance to the standards, I would think it's important to remediate the issues to prevent a possible show-stoppers. How much effort is required to fix these issues?

 *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Octave J. Orgeron
Solaris Systems Engineer
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/sysadmin/
http://unixconsole.blogspot.com
unixconsole@yahoo.com
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*


----- Original Message ----
From: Don Cragun <don.cragun@sun.com>
To: PSARC-ext@sun.com; maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com
Cc: tim.sparlin@sun.com; zfs-boot-team@sun.com; tim.cramer@sun.com; fred.zlotnick@sun.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 6, 2008 6:33:52 PM
Subject: Re: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review]

  
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 15:01:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mark Maybee <maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com>

The ZFS Boot project team wishes to record the following information:

Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.66 04/17/08 SMI
This information is Copyright 2008 Sun Microsystems
1. Introduction
   1.1. Project/Component Working Name:
    ZFS Boot Support Binding Change
   1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier:
    Author:  Lori Alt
   1.3  Date of This Document:
   06 May, 2008
4. Technical Description

A. SUMMARY

This case seeks to change the binding of PSARC/2006/370 (ZFS Boot
Support) from minor binding to patch binding.

B. PROBLEM

The selection of "minor" for the binding of this case was
an error in the original case filing.  ZFS Boot Support was
always intended for integration into a Solaris update release.
It doesn't establish any interface changes that would prevent
it from being implemented as a patch.  It has been designed
    
>from the outset as a feature that could be back-ported to
  
an update release and released as a patch.

C. PROPOSED SOLUTION

Change the binding from "minor" to "patch".
    

Given that ZFS does not yet conform to POSIX and UNIX standards
requirements (even though the zfs(1M) man page says that ZFS provides a
"standard POSIX file system"), that Solaris 8, 9, and 10 and their
updates are covered by several UNIX branding licenses, and that
(according to PSARC 2006/370) it is not possible to go back to a UFS
root after upgrading to a ZFS root, I STRONGLY object to allowing a
patch binding for this case unless a TCR is attached saying that this
feature can't be patched into earlier releases until all POSIX and UNIX
standards conformance bugs have been fixed.

I'm sorry that this information is not available outside of Sun, but
for those inside Sun, the heading "for ZFS:" on web page
http://stds-test.sfbay/resources/brand_status.html can be used as a
guide to known ZFS standards conformance bugs.

The fact that ZFS was granted a conformance waiver to be integrated
into the ON-NV gate before it passed the test suites (with a promise
that the bugs would be fixed before Nevada is released) can't be used
as a waiver for branded products that are already shipping.  Sun has
certified to The Open Group and many of our enterprise customers that
Solaris 8 and its updates, Solaris 9 and its updates, and Solaris 10
and its updates (current and future) do and will continue to conform to
UNIX branding requirements.

- Don

  
6. Resources and Schedule
   6.4. Steering Committee requested information
      6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name:
       ON
   6.5. ARC review type: Automatic
   6.6. ARC Exposure: open
    

_______________________________________________
opensolaris-arc mailing list
opensolaris-arc@opensolaris.org



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-arc mailing list
opensolaris-arc@opensolaris.org
--Boundary_(ID_DigIoXnJu/l1LDCgtw3zPA)-- From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Wed May 7 04:33:05 2008 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m47BX49V026178 for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 04:33:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m47BX22i006885; Wed, 7 May 2008 04:33:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0K0H00M09XF2HB00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 05:33:02 -0600 (MDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0K0H005ASXEZBOC0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 05:32:59 -0600 (MDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.2+Sun/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m47BWsWg027915; Wed, 07 May 2008 07:32:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.2+Sun/8.14.2/Submit) id m47BWsXW027912; Wed, 07 May 2008 07:32:54 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 07:32:54 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review] In-reply-to: <48211666.5020700@sun.com> To: "Mark A. Carlson" Cc: Octave Orgeron , Don Cragun , Fred.Zlotnick@sun.com, maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, zfs-boot-team@sun.com, Tim.Sparlin@sun.com, tim.cramer@sun.com Message-id: <18465.37734.541166.375810@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <595338.28985.qm@web30808.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <48211666.5020700@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 1312 Mark A. Carlson writes: > Why is this particular back ported feature being made an > example of? Isn't most of ZFS already back ported? The current back-ported feature isn't the default or used for the root file system. Users have to "opt into" any conformance bugs it may have. (As they can also "opt into" non-conformance by specifying non-default mount options or third party file systems.) If ZFS root becomes the default, then I agree that Don has a point here. However, in 2006/370, it seems to me that Live Upgrade requires new options in order to do the migration, and jumpstart requires a new keyword to enable ZFS at install time. It doesn't appear to be the default. It's thus still an opt-in feature. Perhaps it should come with advisory information that only UFS is UNIX branded and/or strong advice that whatever remaining compliance nits exist ought to be swept up. This has everything to do with making sure that we don't lose S10 branding. I don't think it has anything to do with making an "example of" some feature. I'm not even sure I know what that means. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From John.Plocher@sun.com Wed May 7 08:52:36 2008 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m47Fqaio003006 for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 08:52:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m47FqA6l012647; Wed, 7 May 2008 08:52:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0K0I00N1L9FK1M00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 08:52:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.133]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0K0I00J8X9FJ7XB0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 08:52:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id m47FqVZ6019387; Wed, 07 May 2008 08:52:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0K0I00K0198GP200@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from John.Plocher@Sun.COM); Wed, 07 May 2008 08:52:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wp668.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.146.226.219]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0K0I00JMZ9FFVWA0@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 08:52:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 08:52:26 -0700 From: John Plocher Subject: Re: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review] In-reply-to: <200805062333.m46NXqec003670@spartan.eng.sun.com> Sender: John.Plocher@sun.com To: Don Cragun Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com, Tim.Sparlin@sun.com, zfs-boot-team@sun.com, tim.cramer@sun.com, Fred.Zlotnick@sun.com Message-id: <4821D03A.3060305@Sun.Com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <200805062333.m46NXqec003670@spartan.eng.sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421) Status: RO Content-Length: 920 Don Cragun wrote: >> Change the binding from "minor" to "patch". > > Given that ZFS does not yet conform to POSIX and UNIX standards > requirements > http://stds-test.sfbay/resources/brand_status.html can be used as a > guide to known ZFS standards conformance bugs This sounds "easy" - if the project team intends to fix these conformance bugs before integration, then there is no problem. If they weren't, then there is simply a TCR for them to do so. We need a response from the project team. Why is this important? If, as Don says: > ... convert an existing (standards conforming) UFS root filesystem into a > (non-conforming) ZFS root. And, unlike other things that have been > patched back into earlier releases, according to the PSARC/2006/307 > case materials, the "upgrade" from UFS to ZFS is one-way ... then this is a trap for the unwary - it violates the principle of least surprise. -John From Mark.Carlson@sun.com Wed May 7 09:05:34 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m47G5XrE003651 for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 09:05:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m47G5QOV012356; Thu, 8 May 2008 00:05:30 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0K0I00001A14A700@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 09:05:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0K0I00JL0A137XC0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 09:05:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-amer-09.sun.com ([192.18.109.79]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id m47G5R3k004035; Wed, 07 May 2008 16:05:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0K0I002018W27U00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Mark.Carlson@Sun.COM); Wed, 07 May 2008 10:05:27 -0600 (MDT) Received: from Macintosh-39.local ([208.54.15.4]) by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0K0I00HBNA0SFSG0@mail-amer.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 10:05:17 -0600 (MDT) Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 10:05:16 -0600 From: "Mark A. Carlson" Subject: Re: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review] In-reply-to: <4821D03A.3060305@Sun.Com> Sender: Mark.Carlson@sun.com To: John Plocher Cc: Don Cragun , Fred.Zlotnick@sun.com, maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, zfs-boot-team@sun.com, Tim.Sparlin@sun.com, tim.cramer@sun.com Message-id: <4821D33C.2000907@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_mHaEdCBziOywcqqOmM3eIQ)" X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <200805062333.m46NXqec003670@spartan.eng.sun.com> <4821D03A.3060305@Sun.Com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421) Status: RO Content-Length: 3856 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_mHaEdCBziOywcqqOmM3eIQ) Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Right. If ZFS was claiming that it was *not* going for POSIX compliance, then we would have an architectural issue. I see this as advice to the C-Team to not allow integration until the bugs are fixed. -- mark John Plocher wrote: > Don Cragun wrote: > >>> Change the binding from "minor" to "patch". >>> >> Given that ZFS does not yet conform to POSIX and UNIX standards >> requirements >> > > >> http://stds-test.sfbay/resources/brand_status.html can be used as a >> guide to known ZFS standards conformance bugs >> > > This sounds "easy" - if the project team intends to fix these > conformance bugs before integration, then there is no problem. > > If they weren't, then there is simply a TCR for them to do so. > > We need a response from the project team. > > Why is this important? If, as Don says: > > >> ... convert an existing (standards conforming) UFS root filesystem into a >> (non-conforming) ZFS root. And, unlike other things that have been >> patched back into earlier releases, according to the PSARC/2006/307 >> case materials, the "upgrade" from UFS to ZFS is one-way ... >> > > then this is a trap for the unwary - it violates the principle of > least surprise. > > -John > > _______________________________________________ > opensolaris-arc mailing list > opensolaris-arc@opensolaris.org > --Boundary_(ID_mHaEdCBziOywcqqOmM3eIQ) Content-type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Right. If ZFS was claiming that it was *not* going for POSIX compliance, then
we would have an architectural issue.

I see this as advice to the C-Team to not allow integration until the bugs
are fixed.

-- mark

John Plocher wrote: 
Don Cragun wrote:
  
Change the binding from "minor" to "patch".
      
Given that ZFS does not yet conform to POSIX and UNIX standards
requirements 
    

  
http://stds-test.sfbay/resources/brand_status.html can be used as a
guide to known ZFS standards conformance bugs
    

This sounds "easy" - if the project team intends to fix these
conformance bugs before integration, then there is no problem.

If they weren't, then there is simply a TCR for them to do so.

We need a response from the project team.

Why is this important?   If, as Don says:

  
... convert an existing (standards conforming) UFS root filesystem into a
(non-conforming) ZFS root.  And, unlike other things that have been
patched back into earlier releases, according to the PSARC/2006/307
case materials, the "upgrade" from UFS to ZFS is one-way ...
    

then this is a trap for the unwary - it violates the principle of
least surprise.

    -John

_______________________________________________
opensolaris-arc mailing list
opensolaris-arc@opensolaris.org
--Boundary_(ID_mHaEdCBziOywcqqOmM3eIQ)-- From bart.smaalders@sun.com Wed May 7 10:06:39 2008 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m47H6dCU009882 for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 10:06:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m47H6ar8011794; Wed, 7 May 2008 10:06:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0K0I00L0NCV2GQ00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 11:06:38 -0600 (MDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.59]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0K0I00HJ4CUX7860@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 11:06:33 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.146.228.109] (cyber.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.228.109]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.2+Sun/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m47H6XCU295057; Wed, 07 May 2008 10:06:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 10:06:33 -0700 From: Bart Smaalders Subject: Re: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review] In-reply-to: <4821D33C.2000907@sun.com> To: "Mark A. Carlson" Cc: John Plocher , Don Cragun , Fred.Zlotnick@sun.com, maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, zfs-boot-team@sun.com, Tim.Sparlin@sun.com, tim.cramer@sun.com Message-id: <4821E199.70609@Sun.COM> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <200805062333.m46NXqec003670@spartan.eng.sun.com> <4821D03A.3060305@Sun.Com> <4821D33C.2000907@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080310) Status: RO Content-Length: 607 Mark A. Carlson wrote: > Right. If ZFS was claiming that it was *not* going for POSIX compliance, > then > we would have an architectural issue. > > I see this as advice to the C-Team to not allow integration until the bugs > are fixed. > I suggest that this issue is more complicated that "just obey the standard", and that preventing ZFS root support from going into S10 because of this issue is mis-guided, to say the least. - Bart -- Bart Smaalders Solaris Kernel Performance barts@cyber.eng.sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/barts "You will contribute more with mercurial than with thunderbird." From tim.marsland@sun.com Wed May 7 10:46:20 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m47HkJuD011209 for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 10:46:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m47Hk43E023361; Thu, 8 May 2008 01:46:13 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0K0I00F01EOWAZ00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 07 May 2008 10:46:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.59]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0K0I00DJKEOWEHC0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 07 May 2008 10:46:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Macintosh-124.local (vpn-129-150-21-191.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.21.191]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.2+Sun/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m47Hk7UI301961; Wed, 07 May 2008 10:46:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 10:46:08 -0700 From: Tim Marsland Subject: Re: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review] In-reply-to: <4821E199.70609@Sun.COM> To: Bart Smaalders Cc: "Mark A. Carlson" , Fred.Zlotnick@sun.com, John Plocher , Don Cragun , maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, zfs-boot-team@sun.com, Tim.Sparlin@sun.com, tim.cramer@sun.com Message-id: <4821EAE0.5060707@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <200805062333.m46NXqec003670@spartan.eng.sun.com> <4821D03A.3060305@Sun.Com> <4821D33C.2000907@sun.com> <4821E199.70609@Sun.COM> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421) Status: RO Content-Length: 608 Just so I'm clear, does this case (or some other case) change the *default* root filesystem in Solaris 10 updates? tim Bart Smaalders wrote: > Mark A. Carlson wrote: >> Right. If ZFS was claiming that it was *not* going for POSIX compliance, >> then >> we would have an architectural issue. >> >> I see this as advice to the C-Team to not allow integration until the bugs >> are fixed. >> > > I suggest that this issue is more complicated that "just obey the standard", > and that preventing ZFS root support from going into S10 because of this > issue is mis-guided, to say the least. > > - Bart > > From Lori.Alt@Sun.COM Wed May 7 10:53:26 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m47HrPYg011281 for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 10:53:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m47HrMrC026279; Thu, 8 May 2008 01:53:22 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0K0I00405F0VDZ00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 10:53:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.98.43]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0K0I003PFF0U8K10@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 10:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-amer-09.sun.com ([192.18.109.79]) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id m47HrIcQ001853; Wed, 07 May 2008 17:53:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0K0I00201DOZEM00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Lori.Alt@Sun.COM) ; Wed, 07 May 2008 11:53:18 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [172.20.25.206] by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0K0I0005MF0O5160@mail-amer.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 11:53:12 -0600 (MDT) Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 11:52:39 -0600 From: Lori Alt Subject: Re: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review] In-reply-to: <4821EAE0.5060707@sun.com> Sender: Lori.Alt@Sun.COM To: Tim Marsland Cc: Bart Smaalders , "Mark A. Carlson" , Fred.Zlotnick@Sun.COM, John Plocher , Don Cragun , maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com, PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, zfs-boot-team@Sun.COM, Tim.Sparlin@Sun.COM, tim.cramer@Sun.COM Reply-to: Lori.Alt@Sun.COM Message-id: <4821EC67.6040103@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <200805062333.m46NXqec003670@spartan.eng.sun.com> <4821D03A.3060305@Sun.Com> <4821D33C.2000907@sun.com> <4821E199.70609@Sun.COM> <4821EAE0.5060707@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080325) Status: RO Content-Length: 835 No, it does not. It is necessary to take explicit action to install a system with a zfs root file system, either interactively or with Jumpstart or with LiveUpgrade. Lori Tim Marsland wrote: > Just so I'm clear, does this case (or some other case) change the > *default* root filesystem in Solaris 10 updates? > > tim > > Bart Smaalders wrote: >> Mark A. Carlson wrote: >>> Right. If ZFS was claiming that it was *not* going for POSIX >>> compliance, then >>> we would have an architectural issue. >>> >>> I see this as advice to the C-Team to not allow integration until >>> the bugs >>> are fixed. >>> >> >> I suggest that this issue is more complicated that "just obey the >> standard", >> and that preventing ZFS root support from going into S10 because of this >> issue is mis-guided, to say the least. >> >> - Bart >> >> From scott.rotondo@sun.com Wed May 7 12:58:29 2008 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m47JwTcS015266 for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 12:58:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m47JwR6W026951; Wed, 7 May 2008 12:58:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0K0I0091HKTECZ00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 13:58:26 -0600 (MDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.59]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0K0I0081GKTDFL10@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 07 May 2008 13:58:25 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.146.108.62] (vinifera.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.62]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.2+Sun/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m47JwPFe336883; Wed, 07 May 2008 12:58:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 12:58:25 -0700 From: Scott Rotondo Subject: Re: ZFS Boot Support Binding Change [PSARC/2008/301 Self Review] In-reply-to: <4821E199.70609@Sun.COM> To: Bart Smaalders Cc: "Mark A. Carlson" , John Plocher , Don Cragun , Fred.Zlotnick@sun.com, maybee@jurassic.eng.sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, zfs-boot-team@sun.com, Tim.Sparlin@sun.com, tim.cramer@sun.com Message-id: <482209E1.2070408@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <200805062333.m46NXqec003670@spartan.eng.sun.com> <4821D03A.3060305@Sun.Com> <4821D33C.2000907@sun.com> <4821E199.70609@Sun.COM> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071119) Status: RO Content-Length: 848 Bart Smaalders wrote: > Mark A. Carlson wrote: >> Right. If ZFS was claiming that it was *not* going for POSIX >> compliance, then >> we would have an architectural issue. >> >> I see this as advice to the C-Team to not allow integration until the >> bugs are fixed. >> > > I suggest that this issue is more complicated that "just obey the > standard", > and that preventing ZFS root support from going into S10 because of this > issue is mis-guided, to say the least. > > - Bart Yes, I imagine that the standards-conformance issues are somewhat complicated, or the open bugs would have been addressed by now. Given that we know we will want to increase, not decrease, the use of ZFS in the future, how can we come to a resolution on the existing POSIX issues? I doubt that either PSARC or the ON C-team is a good forum for that. Scott