Re: zfs and dtrace, as specialized add-ons?

[Kathe <kathe%sdf.org@localhost>]

> From gdt%lexort.com@localhost Wed May 23 14:33:00 2018
> From: Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>
> To: Kathe <kathe%sdf.org@localhost>
> Cc: netbsd-users%netbsd.org@localhost
> Subject: Re: zfs and dtrace, as specialized add-ons?
> OpenPGP: id=098ED60E
> X-Hashcash: 1:20:180523:netbsd-users%netbsd.org@localhost::iEs+bdT6FDUmaPP8:0000000000000000000000000000000000000022VL
> X-Hashcash: 1:20:180523:kathe%sdf.org@localhost::gbQteaxTN53zT7OW:00002U+k
>
> Kathe <kathe%sdf.org@localhost> writes:
>
> > why can't zfs and dtrace be supported as specialized add-ons?
> > so basically, the system delivered as is should not have zfs
> > and dtrace bundle-in but rather be configured and compiled-in
> > by those users who need them.
>
> Why the hatred of zfs?
>
> We don't have a rule that features which are not implemented and working
> on every place you could possibly run NetBSD are banned.  We merely have
> a norm that everything should be done as portably as is reasonably
> possible.
>
> I've had fairly low-resource machines, and not been bothered by
> zfs/dtrace.  (In fact, I hope someone will update zfs to catch up with
> openzfs, so I can use it.)
>
> If you have an actual problem, please post about that problem, and
> perhaps someone can help you.
>

please don't get me wrong, i do not hate zfs. :)