There should be an option to flag for incorrect title ;)
Hah, I just used ‘Fetch Title’. I suppose a more accurate title could be “More DTrace-like capabilities added to Linux”.
It’s disappointing that, much like the development of btrfs instead of adopting ZFS, Linux developers have gone the route of creating their own tracing subsystem. DTrace was open sourced in January 2005…
That said, bcc does look interesting (and it does build on the proven technology of BPF).
Like ZFS DTrace is licensed under CDDL which was designed to be incompatible with the GPL that Linux uses, therefore Linux does exactly the same in both cases: reimplement it.
Yep, I know that both are licensed under the CDDL. A few weeks ago I listened to an interview with @bcantrill where he said that when DTrace was open sourced he had mentioned to someone else at Sun that he expected it would only be a few weeks before it was imported into the Linux kernel. I seems like he (and perhaps by implication Sun?) had no idea how much of an issue the CDDL / GPL issue would be (and it still doesn’t seem to be resolved over ten years later). Of course, many may argue that once Sun became aware of that, they could’ve relicensed it or fixed the CDDL…
I guess we’ll have to see how things pan out with Canonical now including ZFS in Ubuntu (and them taking the view that the two licenses are not incompatible)… And Debian have since followed suit (albeit in source rather than binary form). The Software Freedom Conservancy have commented on the issue and there’s discussion on Stack Exchange. Beware the wormhole!
Update: Whoops, it was @bcantrill’s AMA, not a podcast (wow, bad memory I have!):
I remember vividly standing over a terminal with a bunch of people as we actually launched OpenSolaris (like, clicked carriage return on making the DTrace code live – which was the first in the chute), and the Sun Legal guy and I were chatting. We were both wondering if DTrace was going to show up in Linux in a month or if it would take two years. But that was the range of guesses: neither of us believed that the Linux community themselves would hold up CDDL as an obstacle, and certainly if you told me that a decade later, DTrace wouldn’t be in Linux because of licensing FUD, I wouldn’t have believed you.
Of course, that contradicts with the quote that @ssl linked to.
Can you link to something that shows that it was designed to be incompatible? I’ve only heard stories of engineers at the time and they seemed to think it was going to be adopted quickly.
Danese Cooper (2006). OpenSolaris and CDDL discussion at Debconf 2006 Event occurs at 27:26. Mozilla was selected partially because it is GPL incompatible. That was part of the design when they released OpenSolaris. […] the engineers who wrote Solaris […] had some biases about how it should be released, and you have to respect that