On ZFS becoming the only available FS
Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 12:13 pm
Just read that there seem to be plans to drop UFS support in GhostBSD. If anybody feels like listening to me, by all means reconsider this!
I'm all for ZFS and have argued that I'd like to have BEs supported about a year ago. The general tone back then was: ZFS doesn't make such a good desktop FS. What exactly has lead to changing your minds?
Now that i386 is done for, dropping UFS is the next radical and in fact baneful change that makes it increasingly hard for me to recognize the GhostBSD project that I know and love. For me it was/is a nice GTK+ alternative to TrueOS. While the latter has some really, really neat things in store, it's simply at least one step ahead of what I can use right now.
Should GhostBSD decide to drop UFS support, I'm out. No, that's not a threat, it's a fact. I'm not mortally offended by such a decision; the single reason is that I'm simply stuck with a laptop that cannot boot off GPT partitioned drives and it was decided a year ago that it's not worth implementing MBR-ZFS. This is why I rely on an MBR-UFS drive for the OS and then create a zpool with various datasets by hand!
Oh, and please don't recommend new hardware. It's a third gen i7 machine with 16 GB of RAM which may not be new and shiny but should be pretty much sufficient. I'm in the middle of a long-term fight with the legal authorities of my country (I refuse to accept that they are violating my basic rights as granted by law - but the authorities don't care and probably need to be forced by going to court until the case can be escalated to the EU court). It should not be too hard to imagine that I'm short on money and will be for the foreseeable future.
So are there any reasons where dropping UFS really provides a benefit?
I'm all for ZFS and have argued that I'd like to have BEs supported about a year ago. The general tone back then was: ZFS doesn't make such a good desktop FS. What exactly has lead to changing your minds?
Now that i386 is done for, dropping UFS is the next radical and in fact baneful change that makes it increasingly hard for me to recognize the GhostBSD project that I know and love. For me it was/is a nice GTK+ alternative to TrueOS. While the latter has some really, really neat things in store, it's simply at least one step ahead of what I can use right now.
Should GhostBSD decide to drop UFS support, I'm out. No, that's not a threat, it's a fact. I'm not mortally offended by such a decision; the single reason is that I'm simply stuck with a laptop that cannot boot off GPT partitioned drives and it was decided a year ago that it's not worth implementing MBR-ZFS. This is why I rely on an MBR-UFS drive for the OS and then create a zpool with various datasets by hand!
Oh, and please don't recommend new hardware. It's a third gen i7 machine with 16 GB of RAM which may not be new and shiny but should be pretty much sufficient. I'm in the middle of a long-term fight with the legal authorities of my country (I refuse to accept that they are violating my basic rights as granted by law - but the authorities don't care and probably need to be forced by going to court until the case can be escalated to the EU court). It should not be too hard to imagine that I'm short on money and will be for the foreseeable future.
So are there any reasons where dropping UFS really provides a benefit?